The Moorish writer,Al Edrisi, of Andalusia,Spain, wrote in the early part of the 20th century about the powerful Israelite colony of Lamlam. Lamlam was situated about 2000 miles west of Timbuktu.
Markellion
Edrisi also said the Israelite merchants were then monopolizing the trade that was concentrated at Timbuktu.
And that there only two towns south of The Kingdom of Ghana and says that non-hebrew people of Ghana state dthat the inhabitants are Israelites.
Markellion
The Moorish writer ,Leo Africanus, stated that there was an Medieval Hebrew state called Kamnuria or Kanuria. It's two main cities were Kamnuri & Naghira. & this state was located north of the Senegal River.
Markellion
Also, Our ancestors was singing songs about YHWH,Canaan(Israel),Exodus before being introduced to Christianity by the white slavemasters.
One of these songs called Kumbayah. Kumbayah in Hebrew means Come by here Yahweh. And the word massa was not an ebonic substitute for master. Massa is an Hebrew word & it means burden & oppressor.
In AD 1009, an Israelite Prince named Za Kasi of the Za Dynasty of Ghana became King. And was persuaded to convert to Islam by merchants from the city of Gao. that was already weatlthy & economically powerful.
The reason Za Kasi & some of his people converted to Islam was the Muslims dominated Ghana vital trade links in North Africa & the Sahara & itwas good for Ghana's security to be recognized as having an Muslim king.
That's what somone has been telling me
I'm open minded so my question is, what does anyone here know about lost Hebrew tribes in Africa? Everything I've read says they were pagans or Muslims in west Africa (which is common sense). Are there any girots that claim they come from Israel, how about in the books of Timbuktu. Did any those scholars say any of those things that talk about them being Hebrews lol. Also I thought the rulers of Ghana refused to accept Islam. Ibn Battuta says many in Mali were pagans.
Mabye there were a small minority of Hebrews taken as slaves, we know from genitic tests that the Lemba have genitic influence from the middle east and they claim to be Hebrews. But to think west Africans were all Hebrews, it sounds like pure nonsence and an insult to their African ancestors
So did the guy just make up those quotes
Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
I've heard of the Ethiopian, Igbo, and Lembo Israelites.
The Ethiopian and Lemba are considered legitamit, not sure about the Igbo.
Posted by HornAfrican (Member # 14279) on :
I am wondering did the Lemba always claimed to be Hebrews, even before the genetic test was done to them?
Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
Interesting question.
Posted by Mystery Solver (Member # 9033) on :
The Lemba like many other African natives, didn't wait for European geneticists to come along, to speak of their heritage through oral traditions handed out from one generation to another. If molecular genetics happens to confirm their saying, then it is doing just that - confirming.
Outside expert endeavors and scholarly discourse, molecular geneticis doesn't exactly influence socio-cultural perceptions at large in most societies. In fact, many folks around the globe are oblivious to the workings and hence, significance of molecular genetics. It may modify the perceptions of a few of us in the know, but outside that, there is little it does in that regard to those who aren't.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
The hebrewisraelite.org is still up ... I haven't been to the site since 2001.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Thanks for the information everyone, but one thing
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
On that it is very logical that the Hebrews were black I suppose. But this guy I was talking to believes the majority of slaves taken were Hebrew, but Hebrews being black doesn't mean all blacks are Hebrew.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I read some of the stuff on that site on west African Hebrews and things like circumcision and rituals for a boy becoming a man are found throughout Africa. I'll have to read more about this tomorrow
I've always believed the Jews (I guess I should say Hebrews) learned African traditions in Egypt though
Posted by KemsonReloaded (Member # 14127) on :
I personally question every Jewish view of other people. One must keep their eye open and square on the most basic facts when dealing with such questionable subjects.
What determines legitimate? The CHM (Cohanim Haplotype theory)? Absolutely not!
Posted by Evergreen (Member # 12192) on :
Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
The more apt question is how do those who have called themselves Hebrew over the last 2500 - 3000 years define Hebrew not how those outside the group do.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Don't forget about the Jewish Berbers of North Africa, like the Aures.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
Rubbish. First, Moses was never mistaken for an Egyptian and was actually raised by Hebrews. It was Joseph that was mistaken or disguised himself in such a way that his own brothers thought he was an Egyptian. The Egyptians were ruled by a Semitic people during the time period of the Joseph story. Basically the Pharoah of Egypt was a Eurasian just like Joseph. The Hebrews would not have none that the Pharoah was a foreigner.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
And there was no such thing as Jews or Jewish during the time of Ancient Kemetic civilization. Like other modern day organized religion, Judaism is extremely young.
It may take a while before people actually decide to wake up and see clearly that:
Ancient Kemetians (Egyptians) = Ancient Hebrews = Black Africans.
and
Origin of original ideas behind Christianity = African/Ancient Egyptians spiritual systems (in addition to Islam, Judaism and others).
Traditional African Belief Systems = actual Ancient Hebraic practices unmodified and lacking interference by Europeans and falsely branded pagan practices in attempts to introduce European paganism (read the Anglican row section below (#x)).
The existence of the European version of Christianity is so through the process of modification and perversion of original African idea of Christianity (which was probably not even called Christianity). Perhaps the hundreds of thousands or millions of Black African libraries proudly destroyed by Europeans contained much we don’t know and may have forced Africans to reply heavily on their memories and orally passing on as much knowledge as the possibly can. After all, what more efficient and secured methods exist for passing on priceless experiences and knowledge’s after all your physically recorded documents have constantly been targeted for destruction by “new people” lacking any sense of equal co-existence.
The church entities, resulting from a split between original Orthodox African (Ethiopian) Christianity and the copy-cat version, the Roman/European Christianity, exemplifies some of my points above.
"Traditional African Spiritual belief" is another generic term used to further obscure the identity and the continuation of the original sources of modern day religions.
(#x) Personally, I view it as a complete joke to watch Western church leaders and Rabbis overly attempting to re-colonize the belief systems of Black Africans (who have kept their belief systems since the very distant ancient times). Particularly Jewish Rabbis who are mostly oblivious to the intellectual and spiritual depth of Black Africans fueled by the arrogant in their warped confidence and Talmudic wet dream of bringing Black African tribes like the Igbo, Lemba and others under their so-called religious control. In addition, the row and bitter conflict between African Anglican communities and their Western counterparts perfectly highlights the limits White arrogance and perverted Western practices in church can go especially with the Western ambitious and sneaky attempts to exploit trust and bring devoted religious people and churches under homosexual/pedophile control leadership which I personally deem as a complete abomination and evil from all angles. I’m sure many homosexuals/pedophiles/rapists dwell in the churches in great numbers practicing unforgivable deeds of inhumanities and most remain in their underworld.
Drawing again from my beloved “Black folks talk” or “Ebonics”:
“I lives on the high with da Mos High. Dat homo s*** need to stay far, b-cuz you bring dat s*** around me, you bound to catch a holy scar.”
I can think of no other piece of backing reference at the moment to support my views above, on the internet, than a wonderful piece of article recently published by the “International Herald Tribune” entitled ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: And there was no such thing as Jews or Jewish during the time of Ancient Kemetic civilization. Like other modern day organized religion, Judaism is extremely young.
It may take a while before people actually decide to wake up and see clearly that:
Ancient Kemetians (Egyptians) = Ancient Hebrews = Black Africans.
and
Origin of original ideas behind Christianity = African/Ancient Egyptians spiritual systems (in addition to Islam, Judaism and others).
Traditional African Belief Systems = actual Ancient Hebraic practices unmodified and lacking interference by Europeans and falsely branded pagan practices in attempts to introduce European paganism (read the Anglican row section below (#x)).
The existence of the European version of Christianity is so through the process of modification and perversion of original African idea of Christianity (which was probably not even called Christianity). Perhaps the hundreds of thousands or millions of Black African libraries proudly destroyed by Europeans contained much we don’t know and may have forced Africans to reply heavily on their memories and orally passing on as much knowledge as the possibly can. After all, what more efficient and secured methods exist for passing on priceless experiences and knowledge’s after all your physically recorded documents have constantly been targeted for destruction by “new people” lacking any sense of equal co-existence.
The church entities, resulting from a split between original Orthodox African (Ethiopian) Christianity and the copy-cat version, the Roman/European Christianity, exemplifies some of my points above.
"Traditional African Spiritual belief" is another generic term used to further obscure the identity and the continuation of the original sources of modern day religions.
(#x) Personally, I view it as a complete joke to watch Western church leaders and Rabbis overly attempting to re-colonize the belief systems of Black Africans (who have kept their belief systems since the very distant ancient times). Particularly Jewish Rabbis who are mostly oblivious to the intellectual and spiritual depth of Black Africans fueled by the arrogant in their warped confidence and Talmudic wet dream of bringing Black African tribes like the Igbo, Lemba and others under their so-called religious control. In addition, the row and bitter conflict between African Anglican communities and their Western counterparts perfectly highlights the limits White arrogance and perverted Western practices in church can go especially with the Western ambitious and sneaky attempts to exploit trust and bring devoted religious people and churches under homosexual/pedophile control leadership which I personally deem as a complete abomination and evil from all angles. I’m sure many homosexuals/pedophiles/rapists dwell in the churches in great numbers practicing unforgivable deeds of inhumanities and most remain in their underworld.
Drawing again from my beloved “Black folks talk” or “Ebonics”:
“I lives on the high with da Mos High. Dat homo s*** need to stay far, b-cuz you bring dat s*** around me, you bound to catch a holy scar.”
I can think of no other piece of backing reference at the moment to support my views above, on the internet, than a wonderful piece of article recently published by the “International Herald Tribune” entitled ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”.
Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
Posted by Sundiata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
If you'd follow his argument completely, that would also mean Mesopotamians were black then, so why be selective? Neither equation holds merit imo, though the first Sumerians may have indeed been Dravic/non-semitic (click here).. Aside from that, we all know that your insistence on promoting your Egypt/Mesopotamian connection has more to do with desperate wishful thinking than objectivity.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata:
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
If you'd follow his argument completely, that would also mean Mesopotamians were black then, so why be selective? Neither equation holds merit imo, though the first Sumerians may have indeed been Dravic/non-semitic (click here).. Aside from that, we all know that your insistence on promoting your Egypt/Mesopotamian connection has more to do with desperate wishful thinking than objectivity.
Again you miss the SARCASM!!!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel since contributors usually know nothing about the subject other than their own cherished fantasies.
Case in point.
Of course Moshe was taken as Egyptian and by none other than Midyani (Midianite) -- Yithro's daughters.
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh. Being as much from the Levant, just as Yosef was, they'd've had no taboo against dining with a Hebrew.
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: ... Moses was never mistaken for an Egyptian ...
... Joseph ... his own brothers thought he was an Egyptian.
The Egyptians were ruled by a Semitic people during the time period of the Joseph story. Basically the Pharoah of Egypt was a Eurasian just like Joseph. The Hebrews would not have none that the Pharoah was a foreigner.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel since contributors usually know nothing about the subject other than their own cherished fantasies..
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri?
quote:Case in point.
Of course Moshe was taken as Egyptian and by none other than Midyani (Midianite) -- Yithro's daughters.
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh. Being as much from the Levant, just as Yosef was, they'd've had no taboo against dining with a Hebrew.
^ It makes perfect sense.
But I must ask, now that Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again?? Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
I prefer the Jewish historian Josephus over either the KJV or the Tankah.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious:
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
You question was still answered.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
Intriguing, who is the so called Black Jew? Am I the supposed White Jew? I am not White or Black. I am Jewish by heritage only.
My theory is that the Exodus occurred during the fall of the Hyksos dynasties, however, I am open to additional theories.
What is this:
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh.
How is this Pharoah and what Dynasty?
Yes, indeed Jethro's daughter mistook Moses as an Egyptian. There's a good explaination for that besides Moses being Black. It doesn't appear that the Hebrews had an issue with identifying Moses as an Hebrew. Besides, the fall of the Hyksos dynasty would have left a significant number of mixed race Egyptians (likely royalty as well). Also, the Hyksos ruled Egypt for well over a century and adopted Egyptian ways quite thoroughly. Perhaps the Eastern Midianites/proto-Sabean people were simply misinformed.
Even the Classic writers that describe Egyptians seem to be conflicted. Some say that they look Black w/ Curly hair and then other say that they were more like Norther Indians (in comparison to Ethiopian looking Southern Indians). Is this not explained by foreign rule and subsequent mixing of the populations?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious: The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
I believe your question was answered already. I also forgot to say that Markellion's topic title sounds like the nonsense that is the main tenant of belief of the black cult known as the Black Hebrew Israelites!
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: I prefer the Jewish historian Josephus over either the KJV or the Tankah.
Is there even a difference or conflict specifically between the writings of Josephus and the scripture of his people, the Tanakh? Also, how are the writings of Josephus more reliable in regards to the Exodus since Josephus was born millennia after that event?
quote: Intriguing, who is the so called Black Jew? Am I the supposed White Jew? I am not White or Black. I am Jewish by heritage only.
I regarded Al Takruri as the black Jew and you as the 'white' Jew. I don't know how you look like or how 'white' you are. It was just a presumption based on my observation of your "Eurasian" emphasis on your Jewish heritage.
quote:My theory is that the Exodus occurred during the fall of the Hyksos dynasties, however, I am open to additional theories.
And your theory may be right, but you seem to be going about it the wrong way.
quote:What is this:
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh.
Rm.t.w is the Egyptian word for 'man' or native (Egyptian). A3mw or Aamu is the Egyptian word for Asiatic.
quote:How is this Pharoah and what Dynasty?
Takruri meant there was nothing in Hebrew scripture to suggest the Pharaoh of the exodus was Asiatic himself and not a native Egyptian.
quote:Yes, indeed Jethro's daughter mistook Moses as an Egyptian. There's a good explaination for that besides Moses being Black. It doesn't appear that the Hebrews had an issue with identifying Moses as an Hebrew. Besides, the fall of the Hyksos dynasty would have left a significant number of mixed race Egyptians (likely royalty as well). Also, the Hyksos ruled Egypt for well over a century and adopted Egyptian ways quite thoroughly. Perhaps the Eastern Midianites/proto-Sabean people were simply misinformed.
The problem is that you assume all Hebrews of that time looked a certain way as to appear different from African looking Egyptians, even though such Hebrews were living in Egypt/Africa for quite some time according to Hebrew scripture. I find it funny how you note admixture from Asiatics among the Egyptians even among the royals yet you don't acknowledge Egyptian admixture among the Hebrews even when native Egyptians were the majority whereas Asiatics like the Hebrews were a minority.
Another problem is you assume that Egyptian royals of foreign ancestry could inherit the throne or have any significant part in successio or rule when there is evidence that suggests Egyptians maintained a system to ensure the pharaonic institute lay in the hands of 'pure' natives only.
Also, what did the Midianites have to do with Sabaeans or even proto-Sabaeans??
quote:Even the Classic writers that describe Egyptians seem to be conflicted. Some say that they look Black w/ Curly hair and then other say that they were more like Norther Indians (in comparison to Ethiopian looking Southern Indians). Is this not explained by foreign rule and subsequent mixing of the populations?
You must be mistaken because Classical Greek writers never even ventured into southern India, and described the people of northern India as being Aethiopian! Hence, Classical authors labeled Africans as 'Western Aethiopies' while black Asiatics like Indians were called 'Eastern Aethiopies'.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
[/QUOTE]You must be mistaken because Classical Greek writers never even ventured into southern India, and described the people of northern India as being Aethiopian! Hence, Classical authors labeled Africans as 'Western Aethiopies' while black Asiatics like Indians were called 'Eastern Aethiopies'. [/QUOTE]
According to Arrian (Indica 6.9):
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
I'll create a new thread. This is too pathetic.
Posted by Sundiata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata:
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
No need to educate me on this, I was just making a point that Egyptians have been described in many ways. Perhaps due to the increased multi-ethnic make up of the Egyptian population over time.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata: If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
So the author he quotes is Arrian. Ah, that explains it. By 'Classical' author, I thought Osiriun meant Classical Greek, but it was an author from the Roman period as no Greek or any European has travelled to south India until Roman times.
But notice how Arrian's account is one of those few accounts cited most often by Eurocentrics and white racists in an attempt to refute that ancient Egyptians were black.
quote:9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Of course.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
Eastern Midianites/proto-Sabean people
I call them proto-Sabean people because the Mineans come to control the Midian territories and subsequently the Midianites are somewhat absorbed into this group.
This is from:
The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads By Jan RetsoĚ
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ But the Minaeans are different from proto-Sabaeans. Also, the Minaeans mainly occupied the Arabah territory of the Midianites located in the area south of the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba. Midianite territory was more much more extensive, stretching from north of the Dead Sea in Western Jordan to western part of Sinai according to Hebrew texts.
Also, there are scholars who identify the Midianites with the Hyksos who were expelled from Egypt! Many scholars also identify the Midianites with a people Egyptians called 'Shasu' which is another term for nomads. Some scholars think the Isrealites were part of this group but the Merneptah Stele makes a distinction between the Shasu and Isrealites.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Here are scenes from those well known paintings from the Middle Kingdom tomb of nobleman Knumhotep in modern Beni Hassan depicting an Asiatic group entering Egypt:
men
women
^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Posted by KemsonReloaded (Member # 14127) on :
quote:Here are scenes from those well known paintings from the Middle Kingdom tomb of nobleman Knumhotep in modern Beni Hassan depicting an Asiatic group entering Egypt:
...^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts (again, the use commonsense is very uncommon these days). The artist’s expressions were most likely done by a European or an Arab artist. Therefore, the artist repaints badly eroded Black African image artworks and makes it look like him or herself. Now the correct thing for the poster to do is to find the actual photograph of reference used by artists to illustrate the images. If none exists, debaters should make note of this when they post images like that. This simple method of presentation makes it easy to discover and track lies and errors.
This is why there is confusion where people refer to Ancient Black Africans, who were Ancient Hebrews and exist in the hundreds of millions all over Africa and worldwide today.
As I said before, it may take a while, but eventually all the b.sing will run out of fuel and the truth will come out.
Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts (again, the use commonsense is very uncommon these days). The artist’s expressions were most likely done by a European or an Arab artist. Therefore, the artist repaints badly eroded Black African image artworks and makes it look like him or herself.
Which is why the Egyptians in the reconstruction don't look like black Africans---er, wait...
Why do so many people here believe the Ancient Hebrews were black? Why couldn't they just have been tawny like the other north Arabians?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Those illustrations are based on original surviving paint from the murals. As you can see the Egyptians are painted in a dark brown complexions while the Asiatics are depicted in yellowish complexion.
I don't know what you mean by the Egyptians not looking like black Africans. Are you saying there are no Africans with that complexion and with those features?
As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia but as to whether they were black or not is whole other issue. There is no doubt however that the Hebrews as well as other Semitic speaking people of the Levant did have African influence as can be seen not only among their languages and culture but from anthropology and genetics.
Posted by KemsonReloaded (Member # 14127) on :
quote:Those illustrations are based on original surviving paint from the murals.
Again, the point is why do we need a second hand, foriegn re-dipictions of Ancient works to percieve what Ancient Black Africans looked like?
Where are the photographs showing the original mural dipictions unmodified whether erorded or not ("original surviving paint from the murals")? Are they now totally destroyed leaving us with Euro-Arab second-hand ideas of what ancient people in Africa looked like?
quote:As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia but as to whether they were black or not is whole other issue.
The images provided makes nothing obvious except they “suppose” and are second hand works supposedly based on original Ancient works which we have no way of seeing, effectively rendering any claims of Ancient Hebrews not being Black Africans completely pointless, inadmissible and straw man hunting.
Playing the geographical shifting game and attribute these Ancient Hebrews to Asia while leaving the color of their skin open for debate doesn't help those against the Black African origin of ancient Hebrews. Are we to believe these Ancient Hebrews left Asia, bringing everything to Africa and leaving nothing in Asia to be discovered? If I’m supposed to believe this, then I have to say such hypothesis may be possible attempts at insulting my intelligence. This tired damage control technique is redundant and insufficient at denting the obvious truth. I know it's a hard pill to swallow just as the pill containing the truth that Ancient Kemetians were Black Africans; Ancient Hebrews were also Black Africans and in time, extensive academic works done on the persistent customs and heritage of "Traditional African Spiritual Beliefs" will prove this to be truth and an axiom in purity; and not some Arab or European modification and/or destruction of Ancient works.
Since there are many people on EgyptSearch who may live in Egypt advantaging over those who live here in the U.S., maybe some should volunteer and make the trip with a digital camera and take some pictures for the sake of enhancing points of objectivity.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Again, the point is why do we need a second hand, foriegn re-dipictions of Ancient works to percieve what Ancient Black Africans looked like?
Where are the photographs showing the original mural dipictions unmodified whether erorded or not ("original surviving paint from the murals")? Are they now totally destroyed leaving us with Euro-Arab second-hand ideas of what ancient people in Africa looked like?
Nope. They are right here:
There is no Eurocentric deceit about it. Do you deny the Egyptians depicted these Aamu as light skinned with yellowish complexion??
quote:The images provided makes nothing obvious except they “suppose” and are second hand works supposedly based on original Ancient works which we have no way of seeing, effectively rendering any claims of Ancient Hebrews not being Black Africans completely pointless, inadmissible and straw man hunting.
Playing the geographical shifting game and attribute these Ancient Hebrews to Asia while leaving the color of their skin open for debate doesn't help those against the Black African origin of ancient Hebrews. Are we to believe these Ancient Hebrews left Asia, bringing everything to Africa and leaving nothing in Asia to be discovered? If I’m supposed to believe this, then I have to say such hypothesis may be possible attempts at insulting my intelligence. This tired damage control technique is redundant and insufficient at denting the obvious truth. I know it's a hard pill to swallow just as the pill containing the truth that Ancient Kemetians were Black Africans; Ancient Hebrews were also Black Africans and in time, extensive academic works done on the persistent customs and heritage of "Traditional African Spiritual Beliefs" will prove this to be truth and an axiom in purity; and not some Arab or European modification and/or destruction of Ancient works.
Since there are many people on EgyptSearch who may live in Egypt advantaging over those who live here in the U.S., maybe some should volunteer and make the trip with a digital camera and take some pictures for the sake of enhancing points of objectivity.
LOL YOU are the last one to speak of objectivity when you dismiss Classical Greek artwork as whiteman's frauds because they look, well European! Posted by KemsonReloaded (Member # 14127) on :
Sorry, but these images further amount to insufficiencies and are unsatisfactory in convincing or shaking the firmness of those stubbornly locked onto the truth. Since whole academic arguments have been, and still are, built on Eurocentric myths arguing Black African history, it is perfectly legal under the laws of the universe and human birthright for myself or any other Black African intellect to build solid academic materials completely based on their own view of the world supported by their own research results and what they know or feel to be truthful facts while disregarding Eurocentric views all together if they choose to. After all, multiple ideas can co-exist and most debates centered on ancient Black African histories are constructed with tons of mythical fact but very little truth; even though the people in focus are well and alive in Africa today and carrying on their traditions as they’ve always have.
Basic questions like why the Lemba, Igbo, Ewe, Ashanti, Yoruba, Luo, Wolof and many others Black African groups maintain massive amounts of Ancient Kemetian language structures in their present day languages have not been answered by detractors of the obvious and clear reasons. Or why many of these same Black African groups practice spiritual customs strikingly similar and eerily authentic in their forms and order to that of Ancient Hebraic ones with persistent resistance against foreign attempts to eliminate them. At the same time, melding any adopted foreign religion with their Ancient practices without any feelings of contradictions whatsoever (ex: ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”).
Unfortunately many of these unanswered questions officially remain on the status of “subject of heated debates” and yet, un-sourced images and mythical hypothesis are accepted in arguments with deliberate attempts of further obscuring the true identity of Ancient Hebrews as Black Africans who exist today in fruitful sizes all over Black Africa and out. Myths and creative fantasy stories are good for an entertaining night in front of the big screen displaying cool Disney and Pixar logos, but in reality and in the presence of truthful academic and scientific research, and under the pressures intellectual scrutiny, myths and fantasies in place of reality hold weights equivalent to zero lbs just like the “supposed” images above.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Canaanitic is essentially Hebrew, as far as the language itself goes, but the identity of the traders is given in the text above the dark oryx's head.
What's that funny looking hook thing? And what about that that three humped thing directly behind it?
What do they spell?
Anything familiar sounding?
Hmmm?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes, came from a people who penned themselves in no uncertain terms; sh*hhora ani w*na'wa (black am I and comely)?
Your wishology -- oh how I wish how I wish the Children of Israel were tawny, not black. Oh pretty please god don't let them be (gasp) black -- is a lie.
So get over it boy. Just face the facts as they are, like the Polish do with their Madonna and baby Jesus (Auset and Hor).
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
Why do so many people here believe the Ancient Hebrews were black? Why couldn't they just have been tawny like the other north Arabians?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Like the Macrobians ran it down to Persian Cambyses' Ichthyphagi spies:
Asian hands off what's mine not yours (and be glad I don't covet what's yours).
The Levant is no part of any Asia. I'll be dead and damned before I sit still and allow old Greek misnomers be today's fact when we all know better, that neither the Levant/Mesopotamia/Arabian Peninsula nor the subcontinent of India were ever geologically birthed as, or part of, the geological entity EurAsia.
And I will fight to the death for the land rights of this stolen part of my continent most recently misnomered Middle East.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia ...
Posted by KemsonReloaded (Member # 14127) on :
Even funnier is the fact that many anthropologists and ancient arts specialists are fully aware of the detailed, painstaking rules Ancient Kemetian artists were required to follow, similar to those exercised in creating the artworks of Ife, Igbo-Ukwu, Benin and so on. Yet, those arguing against the Black African origin of Ancient Hebrews and Ancient Kemet and attempting to post questionable images, post images of the poorest artistic quality criminally breaking all the complex rules of required by Ancient royal artists of the civilizations in focus. As a results, we have images, like the ones above were body proportions are completely misaligned and some even looking physically disabled with one arm abnormally larger than the other. Or, pointy nose looking Arabs trying to rock an afro as replacement of Black Africans only adds to the amusements of such fraudulent attempts.
The fine arts of Ancient Kemet, similar to those of Ife, Igbo-Ukwu and Benin, with the aim of constructing ultra realistic representations of objects, human and animal figures (not abstract, ceremonial ones), were contracted with great care and mastery of proportions and the artists understood opposite sides of the body were never perfectly symmetrical; that one ear was always, minutely bigger than the other and they represented these delicate subtleties in their arts. Even in bas-reliefs/original paintings, though harder to control in some aspects, featured such careful approach in proportioning artworks. In contrast to original ancient Black African artworks, the fraudulent images above reveal second-hand works of a hasty incorrect by foreigners racing to replace Black African images with their racial types and so such lies are marred with hilarious and extreme alien-like disfigures.
For those who may not know, ancient Black Africans, as many of them still do today, overwhelmingly carved and constructed whole structures out of rocks, wood, brass, gold and so on, rather than paint. This practice of great physical labor was and still is one of Black Africa’s ways of showing devotion, respect while expressing the African proverb of: “good things come with hard work”. Europeans are mostly know for painting throughout their short history of, gradually coming of age (say 550 years or less), and some Black Africans viewed this as a sign of laziness. From my experience in studying and documenting the redundant patterns of European lies, whenever Eurocentric minds start posting images of paintings in relation to Black African histories, it usually a complete lie, a fabrication and a fraud and should be dismissed immediately until proven otherwise.
It is a shame when people feel they need to hide or destroy original artifacts only the present suggested second-hand replication and then trying to sell them to the public as authentic.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Sorry, but these images further amount to insufficiencies and are unsatisfactory in convincing or shaking the firmness of those stubbornly locked onto the truth. Since whole academic arguments have been, and still are, built on Eurocentric myths arguing Black African history, it is perfectly legal under the laws of the universe and human birthright for myself or any other Black African intellect to build solid academic materials completely based on their own view of the world supported by their own research results and what they know or feel to be truthful facts while disregarding Eurocentric views all together if they choose to. After all, multiple ideas can co-exist and most debates centered on ancient Black African histories are constructed with tons of mythical fact but very little truth; even though the people in focus are well and alive in Africa today and carrying on their traditions as they’ve always have.
Basic questions like why the Lemba, Igbo, Ewe, Ashanti, Yoruba, Luo, Wolof and many others Black African groups maintain massive amounts of Ancient Kemetian language structures in their present day languages have not been answered by detractors of the obvious and clear reasons. Or why many of these same Black African groups practice spiritual customs strikingly similar and eerily authentic in their forms and order to that of Ancient Hebraic ones with persistent resistance against foreign attempts to eliminate them. At the same time, melding any adopted foreign religion with their Ancient practices without any feelings of contradictions whatsoever (ex: ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”).
Unfortunately many of these unanswered questions officially remain on the status of “subject of heated debates” and yet, un-sourced images and mythical hypothesis are accepted in arguments with deliberate attempts of further obscuring the true identity of Ancient Hebrews as Black Africans who exist today in fruitful sizes all over Black Africa and out. Myths and creative fantasy stories are good for an entertaining night in front of the big screen displaying cool Disney and Pixar logos, but in reality and in the presence of truthful academic and scientific research, and under the pressures intellectual scrutiny, myths and fantasies in place of reality hold weights equivalent to zero lbs just like the “supposed” images above.
No need for a long-winded post about Eurocentric myth-making. I already know about that and never denied it, but you are no different if you deny authentic Classical Greek statues are Greek just because they look European.
Moving on...
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Canaanitic is essentially Hebrew, as far as the language itself goes, but the identity of the traders is given in the text above the dark oryx's head.
What's that funny looking hook thing? And what about that that three humped thing directly behind it?
What do they spell?
Anything familiar sounding?
Hmmm?
I don't know, since I don't know Mdu-Neter but as I said some people identify those Asiatics as Hebrew. Not I since I never claimed to know their identity.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Like the Macrobians ran it down to Persian Cambyses' Ichthyphagi spies:
Asian hands off what's mine not yours (and be glad I don't covet what's yours).
The Levant is no part of any Asia. I'll be dead and damned before I sit still and allow old Greek misnomers be today's fact when we all know better, that neither the Levant/Mesopotamia/Arabian Peninsula nor the subcontinent of India were ever geologically birthed as, or part of, the geological entity EurAsia.
And I will fight to the death for the land rights of this stolen part of my continent most recently misnomered Middle East.
LOL You have a point there. And I think you made it already in your thread S.W.A.N.E.A. (SW Asia NE Africa). So call me caught up in 'da tradition' and sue me. Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
As gentlemen, let's duel!
Pistols at twenty paces, OK.
Brrrrrrraaaaaaaappppppppppp. Ooops sorry my machine gun accidently went off as soon as you turned to count paces.
Ah well, all's fair in war.
Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
Sigh...
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
To which Sundiata replied:
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata: If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
...In addition, does anyone notice they way the words were worded?
Look:
"The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia:"
Hmm, ok, but more...
" the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians;"
^Ok.
"the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically."
^^^Most like, perhaps, as in closer to the Egyptians than other Aithiopians which would still make sense assuming [i]Northern Indians being lighter than the two.
So I ask: So what?
quote:9th century A.D.
The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Hmmm... interesting. Since when have ancient writers stopped regarding Israel as black? I have this funny feeling that the dis-association of their progenator (that is, for 'Jews' and 'Arabs' both) with black probably [b]began somewhere, out of Levantine bias or wishful thinking (NOT saying Arabs always and only hated blacks, or anything).
Please don't give me any of that 'Semite' crapony, as, aside from its plain out faultiness, it comes from a word meaning half, and is usially associated with Shem although he is the brother of Ham, all mythical characters.
I'm not dealing in mythology. Yes, we can use texts like the Bible as historical text, but my main concern is the Arabs. It's whether or not they wanted to dis-associate themselves with anything black, which is likely if you aks me...
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy.
Disregarding you're previous post, I'd like to know how one comes up with this concoction..
quote:However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans.
O.
quote: Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
Good to know.
quote:I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
I know a Jew, or supposed Jew who follows the Bible. Well, I don't know him personally or how closely he follows the Bible. I do aggree that that is a bit strange.
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts
Interesting...but given your track record [with the 'black african ancient Greeks'] and all, I'd say that whether or not the repro is accurate, I'mma be keepin ma eye on you buddy...
EDIT:
quote:alTakruri: Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes, came from a people who penned themselves in no uncertain terms; sh*hhora ani w*na'wa (black am I and comely)?
Ever so nicely put, alTakruri.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: LOL You have a point there. And I think you made it already in your thread S.W.A.N.E.A. (SW Asia NE Africa). So call me caught up in 'da tradition' and sue me.
^Lmao, He does have a point there about 'da tradition'.
quote:AlTakruri:
As gentlemen, let's duel!
Pistols at twenty paces, OK.
Brrrrrrraaaaaaaappppppppppp. Ooops sorry my machine gun accidently went off as soon as you turned to count paces.
Ah well, all's fair in war.
LOL
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
If Any7thing the ancient Hebrews were a mixed people of Migrating Northeast africans (probably horn or Egypt) and indigenous population of Anatolia/Levant.
The E3b haplogroup has been observed in all Jewish groups world wide. It is considered to be the 2nd most prevelent haplogroup amoung the Jewish population.
According to one major paper,
E-M35 is considered to be the second highest, next to J, for "Founding Jewish Lineages" in Europe.
Also the ancient hebrews would have been similar in phenotype to the palestinians not like these plastic Jews (majority today) who parade their "jewishness" like there is no tomorrow, and are mainly derived of German, polish and other east european ancestry who occupied this religion during the "middle ages".
Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I don't know what you mean by the Egyptians not looking like black Africans. Are you saying there are no Africans with that complexion and with those features?
I was being sarcastic. Kemson dismissed the non-black Hebrews in that reconstruction as Europeans trying to hide an African phenotype, even though they failed to erase the African appearance of the Egyptians.
Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes
Actually the Hebrews could be even more violent than the Germanic peoples, if Biblical scripture can be trusted. Have you actually read the Old Testament? There is no shortage of incidents where the Hebrews or their divine benefactor commit genocide against other desert tribes. Now I don't know much about pagan Germanic history, but I understand that they were usually raiders rather than exterminators of entire populations (and, of course, it's likely that Roman sources exaggerated their brutality to justify their subjugation, much as the British and Americans emphasized the "savagery" of their African and Native American victims).
Besides, would the world really be worse off if white Europeans did not have Christians forcing their religion onto us? None of the indigenous religions of Europe (Celtic, Germanic, Greco-Italic, etc.) compelled their followers to force them upon other populations like the Abrahamic faiths. On the other hand, if it weren't for Jews, Christians and Muslims believing they had a divine mission to "civilize" (read "ransack and exploit") the world, Africa would still be rich, and Native Americans would not be a minority in their own homeland.
Now who are the real barbarians?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
To Osiriun's comment about north Indians, I hope you realize that not only did the first (pre-Roman period) Greeks describe them as black (Aethiope) but black peoples still exist to this day in the north Indian and Pakistani region.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: If Any7thing the ancient Hebrews were a mixed people of Migrating Northeast africans (probably horn or Egypt) and indigenous population of Anatolia/Levant.
The E3b haplogroup has been observed in all Jewish groups world wide. It is considered to be the 2nd most prevelent haplogroup amoung the Jewish population.
According to one major paper,
E-M35 is considered to be the second highest, next to J, for "Founding Jewish Lineages" in Europe.
Also the ancient hebrews would have been similar in phenotype to the palestinians not like these plastic Jews (majority today) who parade their "jewishness" like there is no tomorrow, and are mainly derived of German, polish and other east european ancestry who occupied this religion during the "middle ages".
^ Yeah. I believe Yonis hit it right on target with this post.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: Actually the Hebrews could be even more violent than the Germanic peoples, if Biblical scripture can be trusted. Have you actually read the Old Testament? There is no shortage of incidents where the Hebrews or their divine benefactor commit genocide against other desert tribes. Now I don't know much about pagan Germanic history, but I understand that they were usually raiders rather than exterminators of entire populations (and, of course, it's likely that Roman sources exaggerated their brutality to justify their subjugation, much as the British and Americans emphasized the "savagery" of their African and Native American victims).
Just to point out, but has anyone noticed that Arab tribal behavior and especially that of the Jihadists bears a striking resemblance to early Hebrews-- with regards to religious fanatism etc.?
quote:Besides, would the world really be worse off if white Europeans did not have Christians forcing their religion onto us? None of the indigenous religions of Europe (Celtic, Germanic, Greco-Italic, etc.) compelled their followers to force them upon other populations like the Abrahamic faiths. On the other hand, if it weren't for Jews, Christians and Muslims believing they had a divine mission to "civilize" (read "ransack and exploit") the world, Africa would still be rich, and Native Americans would not be a minority in their own homeland.
Now who are the real barbarians?
Uh.. That's another whole nother issue I don't feel like getting into at the moment. But I will say that ironically if it wasn't for Christianity, we wouldn't be celebrating all of these European pagan holidays disguised as Christian ones like Christmas, Easter, and Halloween! LOL Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
The real barbarians are the Europeans to the north of the Alps. Every fool, save one, knows that. Now go drink a beer and get in a brawl and make pretend you're in your white man's indigenous heaven Valhalla. That's what you call a religion? No wonder you all gave it up so easily -- to the woe of Africa, Asia, and the Americas.
Meanwhile, much to your lamented chagrin, the Children of Israel remain self-desribed as blacks not tawny the way you wish they were in your fantasy (possibly induced from some concussion received in some earthly Valhalla (Honky Tonk).
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: Now who are the real barbarians?
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
Whoa! That was a bit harsh and uncalled for don't you think?
I remember you threatening to leave this place because some poster commented on jews in a fashion you didn't like and you demanded the moderaters to do something or else, but apparently you see nothing wrong when it's you talking in a negative way about others ancestry as you just did above, talk about double standards.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
So is that a request for me to prime the cannon your way?
In the meantime please list via direct quote what you find me "talking in a negative way about others ancestry."
I will then see if its a verifiable fact or a pejorative barb.
Besides, my half-Euro al~Takruri bastards will tell you I love their mommies' Honky Tonk Badonkadonk (well at least for the night they were conceived).
And mind you I defended that boy many a time in the past only to have him s h i t on my head the first opportunity he had.
Also if you archive search carefully or really monitor my posts so eagle eyed, you read me complimenting Euros when deserved.
You on the otherhand ...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I agree with Yonis that you were wrong for saying that, but then again you are also right for your reasons but...
quote:Besides, my half-Euro al~Takruri bastards will tell you I love their mommies' Honky Tonk Badonkadonk (well at least for the night they were conceived).
LMAO
I don't know what to say about this, except I hope this is just a joke, or else that child-support must be also partly to blame for your mood! LOL Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The real barbarians are the Europeans to the north of the Alps. Every fool, save one, knows that. Now go drink a beer and get in a brawl and make pretend you're in your white man's indigenous heaven Valhalla. That's what you call a religion? No wonder you all gave it up so easily -- to the woe of Africa, Asia, and the Americas.
Meanwhile, much to your lamented chagrin, the Children of Israel remain self-desribed as blacks not tawny the way you wish they were in your fantasy (possibly induced from some concussion received in some earthly Valhalla (Honky Tonk).
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: Now who are the real barbarians?
Notice how you didn't answer the other points in my post. And don't you dare say the h-word, it's just like the n-word.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Who cares who you agree with? What are you? My personal Jiminey Cricket or some s h i t ?
Anyway ...
Their mommis are so glad to have an al~Takruri bastard (well it's really the al~Takruri technique for engendering lovable little bastards) that they pay me whenever I come around for a visit.
There was a little trouble with Grimmel, the Barbarian girl, though. She wanted me to take up the scatter gun and shoot them down one by one. I dunno, she said they kept mouthing off about belonging to the superior race. Go figure.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Besides, my half-Euro al~Takruri bastards will tell you I love their mommies' Honky Tonk Badonkadonk (well at least for the night they were conceived).
LMAO
I don't know what to say about this, except I hope this is just a joke, or else that child-support must be also partly to blame for your mood! LOL
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Don't act the damned fool boy.
Honky tonk ain't no pejorative. You never heard the Rolling Stones song Honky Tonk Women or that tune by Trace Adkins the number one admirer of the cute little asses on indigenous hormone free white girls? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epdmJwH-IdU
And as far as Hunky goes all my Hungarian crew call each other that all the damn day long.
As pejorative Honky don't mean much unless you one of those white boys riding around the black hood honking your car's horn at every black girl you see because you want one for a girlfriend or a friendly tie on. Is that you?
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Now go drink a beer and get into a brawl and make pretend you're in your white man's indigenous heaven Valhalla.
Besides, if Abraham and Sarah were both Black why would he be so worried about his Wife Sarah and taking her to Egypt - perhaps the Egyptians had a thing for light skin women? At least that's my take on it. Besides, every depiction I have seen of Asiatics in Egypt clearly shows them tawny sheep herding types.
Hebrew + African = Arab
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
E3b found in Jews. Yeah, so. We were in Egypt for quite sometime and we did mix with them and the Canaanites. I am sure Jesus had E3b as well considering his heritage. It is not at all irregular to think that Jews are part Black. However, how does one conclude that Abraham a Chaldean from Ur was Black? How does one jump to that conclusion?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
But unfortunately Osiriun is really not a Jew.
Just so everyone should know there's only one population set of self-named Black Jews. They were the first Jews to settle in India at Cochin.
Sarah was neither black skinned nor dark.
Jews stem from Y*huda son of Ya`aqob son of Yisshaq son of Abraham husband to Sarah.
As easily seen a lot happened between Imma Sarah and her greatgrandson Y*huda the first Jew -- not to mention his children and the whole host of the Tribe of Y*huda, the later Kingdom of Y*huda, the state of Judea, and the Jews after the dispersion.
None of this bears on either the only authentic ancient portraits of Y*hudiym (citizens of the Kingdom of Judah) or upon Ribbi Eli`ezer's record of Shem's colour -- sh*hhora w*na'awa.
Can you translate sh*hhora w*na'awa? Can you read the Pirqe de Ribbi Eli`ezer? Do you even know what that work is?
As for the only authentic portraiture of Jews, it can be found in the archive I tire of reposting them season after season.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
Jews did not exist during AE times. Israelites - maybe but not Jews. Hebrew would be the correct term you are after.
Again Hebrew is a Nomadic Semite of Summerian origins.
Black as you are likely to be is not Semite but Kushitic.
Semite + Kushite = Ishmaelite.
;-)
Here's how I see it. Jew is a person that the Germans would have thrown into the concentration camps during World War II. Being that my grandfather escaped such persecution by fleeing to England I think I have the right to claim such heritage.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Uh oh. It has begun! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
By the way...
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: don't you dare say the h-word, ...
Don't act the damned fool boy.
Honky tonk ain't no pejorative. You never heard the Rolling Stones song Honky Tonk Women or that tune by Trace Adkins the number one admirer of the cute little asses on indigenous hormone free white girls? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epdmJwH-IdU
And as far as Hunky goes all my Hungarian crew call each other that all the damn day long.
As pejorative Honky don't mean much unless you one of those white boys riding around the black hood honking your car's horn at every black girl you see because you want one for a girlfriend or a friendly tie on. Is that you?
T-rex, Takruri is correct. He didn't say Honky but 'Honky Tonk' which was a word invented/popularized by the Rolling Stones. Also the racial epithet 'honky' as popularized by blacks in the late 60s and early 70s does come from the expression of white males honking their car horns trying to pick up black girls. Although like all racial epithets, it's still wrong you cannot compare the etymology let alone history of the word 'honky' with n**ger! The latter word basically and essentially means black and but carried every negative and racist notions and ideas whites had for blacks and was used for centuries.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
"Shem was especially blessed black and beautiful" Pirqe de Ribbi Eli`ezer 28a
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
Black as you are likely to be is not Semite but Kushitic.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
As we all know myopia isn't 20/20. Hence the way you see it is a disease. Hitler made you a Jew? So there were no Jews before Hitler?
Anyway, view Josef Nassy interned at Tittmoning.
He's a direct descendent of the illustrious Joseph de David Nassy parnas of the Spanish&Portuguese colourlingen Jews of 18th century Surinam.
You, whoever you really are, are no Jew at all. You lack pedigree. Grandfather does not make for a Jew and neither do you.
Ah, where do all these wannabe people come from? Can't they just be who they are instead rustling into other's identities.
What's that you say? No self-esteem. O I C
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
Here's how I see it. Jew is a person that the Germans would have thrown into the concentration camps during World War II. Being that my grandfather escaped such persecution by fleeing to England I think I have the right to claim such heritage.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
No way DJ.
He'd get a free high quality education out of it. But for me, what'd I get from it? He's got nothing absolutely no thing at all in the very least to offer me. I ain't stupid enough to enter into an uneven exchange weighted against me. Besides, what fun is it to watch a panther pitted against a peacock?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Uh oh. It has begun!
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
I can trace my ancestry back to the 13th century.
How far can you go? I really don't like to be rude but if you insist.
Besides as far as Black Jews, I have that on my father's side as well. Fallasha!
Either side, I have actuall ancestry rather than fantasy!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
You partial Beta Israel? Hahahahahaha Why that's the greatest fantasy of all! You have no pedigree. You are not a Jew.
You're really funny. Tell us some more jokes. You got no Jew but you do got jokes.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You partial Beta Israel? Hahahahahaha Why that's the greatest fantasy of all! You have no pedigree. You are not a Jew.
You're really funny. Tell us some more jokes. You got no Jew but you do got jokes.
Enough, I have a history and you have nothing but a hope for a shadowy connection.
I would rather learn more about my great grandfathers heritage than spend time discussing nonesense. Do you happen to know if there has been any breakthroughs on Mereotic script?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Well start making sense and stop claiming to be what you obviously are not.
But it is true that you have a history. You have a history of posting nonsense on this forum.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Perhaps it would help to ask who is more knowledgeable on ancient Hebrew script, and whoever is cite verification of said claims.
By the way, can Takruri or someone explain to me what sh*hhora w*na'awa and Pirqe de Ribbi Eli`ezer are as it pertains to Jewish script??
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well start making sense and stop claiming to be what you obviously are not.
But it is true that you have a history. You have a history of posting nonsense on this forum.
The Iglehart family goes way back. But it is rather meaningless isn't it unless you are a practicing and culturally a Jew like yourself. I don't claim to be a Jew like yourself if that is indeed how you see yourself. I don't know any Hebrew or even know about Jewish culture. My family are Christian Jews on both sides and I know nothing of Jewish traditions.
What interested me about this site was the reference to the Natufians having Negroid features. If the Biblical account of creation is true then we should have Africans actually migrating out of the Levant into Africa rather than the way we have been taught by the evolutionists. It is intriguing to find that some of the first known cities have people with African features. This reminds me of Sumerian artificats that also shows African looking people. Imagine that - we are all from a location in West Asia and that all of the scientific data that we take for granted suggesting we actually originated in Africa is flawed. I am not convinced of that and I reallize almost all of you believe in the out of Africa theory. I too believe primarily in that theory but I am starting to question it based on foundings that seem to point to a different point of origin.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
What is up with this Jewish b/s? Can someone talk about the origins of Yisra`el. We know that Europeans who claim to be descendants Ya'qub is not of that line but that they started in the 13th century which is where osiriun actually traces his history too.
Al-Takruri is very knowledgeable on Jewish scriptures and it is obvious that he is fluent in the language of the Jewish/Yiddish people ... but what about the original origins of the original people.
We also know that the Western Sahel cover Senegal-Gambia, Mali ... etc ... which is western Africa. My question to you Al-Takruri is how did your people and heritage reach over to West Africa if the Yisra`elites were from East Africa (i.e. so-called Middle East)?
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
P.S. don't mean to offend the Jewish religion but I've always been curious as to why the Jewish (Y`ahuda)has been made the Head religion of the Yisra`elites when Efrayim took the inheritance from R`uben.
It was the customs of the Yisra`elites to give the inheritance to the first born son but that inheritance was taken from R`uben and given to Efrayim. Its seems that if a religion was to be created from one of the children then it would have been Efrayim and not Y`hudah. Never the less there were 12 tribe to Yisra`el or 12 nations so why would people take Y`hudah as to the leader? Is it because the scriptures say that the Shebet shall not leave Y`hudah?
Doesn't that mean that the Stick or rod of lawgiving will not pass from the hands of Y`hudah but it doesn't mean that he will rule. The Supreme Court make the laws for this country but they do not rule this country ...
Its backward ... This whole Jewish thing ... It should be named after the father Yisra`el vs the one son Y`hudah or Efrayim whom the inheritance was given too.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well start making sense and stop claiming to be what you obviously are not.
But it is true that you have a history. You have a history of posting nonsense on this forum.
The Iglehart family goes way back. But it is rather meaningless isn't it unless you are a practicing and culturally a Jew like yourself. I don't claim to be a Jew like yourself if that is indeed how you see yourself. I don't know any Hebrew or even know about Jewish culture. My family are Christian Jews on both sides and I know nothing of Jewish traditions.
What interested me about this site was the reference to the Natufians having Negroid features. If the Biblical account of creation is true then we should have Africans actually migrating out of the Levant into Africa rather than the way we have been taught by the evolutionists. It is intriguing to find that some of the first known cities have people with African features. This reminds me of Sumerian artificats that also shows African looking people. Imagine that - we are all from a location in West Asia and that all of the scientific data that we take for granted suggesting we actually originated in Africa is flawed. I am not convinced of that and I reallize almost all of you believe in the out of Africa theory. I too believe primarily in that theory but I am starting to question it based on foundings that seem to point to a different point of origin.
The biblical or Torah creation theory is very much true if you can understand it properly ... Science agree with it as in the sense that the Universe has been around for about 15 billion years or so... mathematically this is the number that science has given as well.
As far as your findings ... can you please post them ...
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I am not, nor do I know, Yiddish.
I am al~Takruri.
My handle reveals all.
I have no time to field queries from people who equate Jewish with b/s.
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious: What is up with this Jewish b/s?
Al-Takruri ... is fluent in the language of the Jewish/Yiddish people ...
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well start making sense and stop claiming to be what you obviously are not.
But it is true that you have a history. You have a history of posting nonsense on this forum.
The Iglehart family goes way back. But it is rather meaningless isn't it unless you are a practicing and culturally a Jew like yourself. I don't claim to be a Jew like yourself if that is indeed how you see yourself. I don't know any Hebrew or even know about Jewish culture. My family are Christian Jews on both sides and I know nothing of Jewish traditions.
What interested me about this site was the reference to the Natufians having Negroid features. If the Biblical account of creation is true then we should have Africans actually migrating out of the Levant into Africa rather than the way we have been taught by the evolutionists. It is intriguing to find that some of the first known cities have people with African features. This reminds me of Sumerian artificats that also shows African looking people. Imagine that - we are all from a location in West Asia and that all of the scientific data that we take for granted suggesting we actually originated in Africa is flawed. I am not convinced of that and I reallize almost all of you believe in the out of Africa theory. I too believe primarily in that theory but I am starting to question it based on foundings that seem to point to a different point of origin.
The biblical or Torah creation theory is very much true if you can understand it properly ... Science agree with it as in the sense that the Universe has been around for about 15 billion years or so... mathematically this is the number that science has given as well.
As far as your findings ... can you please post them ...
I have tried to google search for these pictures from Sumeria but I have not been able to find them. I saw them in a book when I was in college. Basically it was pottery with different Summerians on them. The Summerian features were very diverse. It was as if the racial features that we see around us were over exaggerated. White people have over exaggerated high nasal roots and extremely sunken aveolar bones. Black people, who were sitting on what appears to be thrones along side White people, had prognathism and low nasal roots. Then there were several other groups represented with differing features. It struck me that perhaps the cradle of man really was in this area and that the Children of Ham did really migrate outward after the fall of the sociey that built the tower of Babel. Now I haven't believe in that account of creation for decades but I keep running into things, such as the Natufians, that keeps reminding me of the Geniuses account.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious:
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well start making sense and stop claiming to be what you obviously are not.
But it is true that you have a history. You have a history of posting nonsense on this forum.
The Iglehart family goes way back. But it is rather meaningless isn't it unless you are a practicing and culturally a Jew like yourself. I don't claim to be a Jew like yourself if that is indeed how you see yourself. I don't know any Hebrew or even know about Jewish culture. My family are Christian Jews on both sides and I know nothing of Jewish traditions.
What interested me about this site was the reference to the Natufians having Negroid features. If the Biblical account of creation is true then we should have Africans actually migrating out of the Levant into Africa rather than the way we have been taught by the evolutionists. It is intriguing to find that some of the first known cities have people with African features. This reminds me of Sumerian artificats that also shows African looking people. Imagine that - we are all from a location in West Asia and that all of the scientific data that we take for granted suggesting we actually originated in Africa is flawed. I am not convinced of that and I reallize almost all of you believe in the out of Africa theory. I too believe primarily in that theory but I am starting to question it based on foundings that seem to point to a different point of origin.
The biblical or Torah creation theory is very much true if you can understand it properly ... Science agree with it as in the sense that the Universe has been around for about 15 billion years or so... mathematically this is the number that science has given as well.
As far as your findings ... can you please post them ...
I have tried to google search for these pictures from Sumeria but I have not been able to find them. I saw them in a book when I was in college. Basically it was pottery with different Summerians on them. The Summerian features were very diverse. It was as if the racial features that we see around us were over exaggerated. White people have over exaggerated high nasal roots and extremely sunken aveolar bones. Black people, who were sitting on what appears to be thrones along side White people, had prognathism and low nasal roots. Then there were several other groups represented with differing features. It struck me that perhaps the cradle of man really was in this area and that the Children of Ham did really migrate outward after the fall of the sociey that built the tower of Babel. Now I haven't believe in that account of creation for decades but I keep running into things, such as the Natufians, that keeps reminding me of the Geniuses account.
Please remember that when your dealing with biblical histories your dealing with fairly new history. For this reason they weren't able to actually pin point the direct location of Abram i.e. Abraham. If you were to look at the actual name then you would see that Abram and Abraham means father ... why? This is a name that was newly assigned to the original names of the Hebraic patriarch's which just so happens to be the so-called father of the Yisra`elites.
Now when you say the tower of Babel ... I must insist that you do further research because you might see that the tower of Babel may be the same monument as the Gaza tower ... which is located ... I don't have to say because you already know.
Now, so that I may be clear ... if you understand that the bible history is written in parables then you must know that the time-line of the biblical character may be much older then represented in the Old Testament i.e. Torah - Tanach/Tanakh. Al-Takruri knows a lot about this if he is not stuck on the writing of the Yiddish speaking Talmud speakers ...
I will put it real clear ... the Hebraic writings are not the writings of the original Hebrews ... The original Hebrews were consider 'traders'... not in the sense the Europeans try to make it but in the sense the Egyptians said it. Hibiru ... equal 'Traders' but modernist tried to make the word mean ... merchants which is a word they would have used if that was the word that they were looking for.
I'm kind of rambling on because I want Al-Takruri to jump in and give his piece ... but the real deal is The ancient Hebrews were actually a sect of Egyptians who were the priestly tribe. In Psalms 48 it speaks of the great city called Zion, but Zion is really the ancient city of Lower Egypt called Zoan which is modernly known as Tunias.
Like I said I'm rambling on but ... your question are very easy to answer ... I'm just looking for the one who answers questions using the Yiddish/Hebrew tongue to colab with me on this subject ...
Peace!~
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
P.S. Al-Tukruri ... If you don't know my name which reveals all as well. I don't play with religious people so if you feel up to if then deal with RU2RELIGIOUS ... Or I will take you as a fake ...
Your name say it all just like mines do ... I know that you know the modern version of Yiddish/Hebrew but I'm well versed in it as well ... You control this forum to a certain degree when it comes to certain topics as such but ... I'm a man who loves to speak about the Torah/Tanakh so I would love to speak with you on the level that I haven't seen anyone else speak to you on ... Al-Tukruri ...
How are you Yiddish ... I'm sorry I mean, Hebrew if you are on the West Coast of Africa and you proclaim that their wasn't an influx of East African's to the West Coast of Africa?
Please don't get me wrong .. .I don't study with the Hebrew Israelites or anybody else for that matter ... I study for myself ...
You are very intelligent so I know that you will be able to converse with me in an adult fashion, but a cop out is to say that you are Al-Tukruri so your name say it all.
I'm R U 2 religious and my name say it all on a historical/Anthropological/Archaeological website. If you step into my domain, I will see where you are at. Rasol, Djehuti, Al-Tukruri are experts on the history of Egypt ... but I'm an expert on religion so don't get me twisted~ ... lol
This is what I have a Ph.D in ... but forget European certs ... I've studied enough to know that they don't mean shyt when it comes to real knowledge so I question the man who I believe can shut me down if he is able ...
My name is RU2religious ... your in my world and I 'm in yours .. lol ...
Hit me up or avoid this one like the others that I've posted on ...
Please note to those who don't know ... I've learned a lot from Al-Tukruri and will continue to learn from his whether he knows it or not, but religion is my thing because I hate it so much and thus those who are religious I will question them on their belief ...
This doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the poster ... Al-Tukruri is one of the best and have been for years and will be further more ... but religion is my domain ... and I will shut down this jewish b/s because it is 2 new for it to have as much power as it does over the whole world.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
The ancient Hebrew Israelites were black. If you believe in the story of Moses you would know that he was raised as an Egyptian and the pharaoh believed he was his son. The majority of the people on this site know that the ancient Egyptians were black. How can the pharaoh possibly be tricked into believing that Moses was his son, an Egyptian, if he was of West Asian descent. I don't know why you all overlook this.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts (again, the use commonsense is very uncommon these days). The artist’s expressions were most likely done by a European or an Arab artist. Therefore, the artist repaints badly eroded Black African image artworks and makes it look like him or herself.
Which is why the Egyptians in the reconstruction don't look like black Africans---er, wait...
Why do so many people here believe the Ancient Hebrews were black? Why couldn't they just have been tawny like the other north Arabians?
What the hell do you mean why couldn't they just have been tawny like north Arabians? Because they weren't! You can't just make anyone look like you want them to. They couldn't look like north Arabians because they weren't north Arabians.
Posted by osiriun (Member # 14297) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: The ancient Hebrew Israelites were black. If you believe in the story of Moses you would know that he was raised as an Egyptian and the pharaoh believed he was his son. The majority of the people on this site know that the ancient Egyptians were black. How can the pharaoh possibly be tricked into believing that Moses was his son, an Egyptian, if he was of West Asian descent. I don't know why you all overlook this.
The Egyptians at this time commonly took Asiatic, Nubian and even occasianaly European concubines. The Pharoahs DAUGHTER is not what it seems to mean. The Pharoahs had hundreds of offspring from any number of foreign women. Also, this Daughter was not married when she adopted Moses. Furthermore, Moses was brought up by his mother until he was 13 years old. Then you have another problem and that is Moses name itself is Semitic in origin and was given to him by his Egyptian Mother.
The Hebrew word: Mashash means to draw out.
Moses or Mashash was drawn out of the water.
Now why would an Egyptian woman use a Semitic derived name for her child? Perhaps because she was actually Semitic herself and also adopted?
There are other explainations is all I am trying to get you to consider!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I don't have a religion nor do I have time for folk obsessed with it. I find them to be the epitome of irrationality.
Over and out.
Let this comic book and its comic book writers carry on with all the best of personal fantasy at their farcical command.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
and that is the response I expected ...
Its not about fantasy its about trying to understand the truth of a situation. I asked the first question about how do you know if you are of jewish descent if you live in the Western Sahel but don't believe that there was an influx or should I say migration from the East Coast of Africa to the West.
For some reason I guess you feel that you are above answering questions so I went out of my way to make a foolish challenge to bring you to life.
The teaching of the ancient Yisra`elites was not a religious thing of course ... it was their culture ... so thus there is really nothing to debate in that sense.
Simple questions that don't get answered kind of makes me tug a little at the person who I know has much knowledge in a certain area ... don't take it personal and please don't take me for a fantasy junkie because I don't believe in them ... once again ... my name is RU2religious which means I don't believe in fantasies ... but facts ...
Now do you have the time to answer the simple questions as to ... why do you believe you are of Jewish/newish (reminder a religion) decent being from western Africa when the whole Hebrew thing started in the Middle East i.e. ancient East Africa?
Secondly,why is there a such thing as jewism (NEW WORD) ... lol, when there were supposedly 12 nations to Yisra`el, so why did the Europeans feel it necessary to build a whole religion based on the tribe/nation of Y`hudah; excluding the other tribes/nations as tho they weren't just as important if the story is real?
Simple questions deserve simple answers or do you think that you are far to knowledgeable to answer what you would consider simple questions ...
have your head gotten that big where you think that you can't answer questions? I'm not a new poster on this site ... and I'm definitely not one who you can just say anything and I keep my mouth shut ... man up sir ...
I've been around for a lot of years ... thus I know the personalities of the most ancient posters on this site ... I'm not trying to be rude to ya ... I just want simple answers to simple questions
P.S. Please forgive ... if you feel that I was disrespecting you in any form or fashion ... lastly ... when you write if it is possible .. please use words that normal readers can understand ... I know what your writing because that is how I speak in a business setting ... but com 'on man ... this is the internet ... no need to show off... lol
thank you!
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun:
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: The ancient Hebrew Israelites were black. If you believe in the story of Moses you would know that he was raised as an Egyptian and the pharaoh believed he was his son. The majority of the people on this site know that the ancient Egyptians were black. How can the pharaoh possibly be tricked into believing that Moses was his son, an Egyptian, if he was of West Asian descent. I don't know why you all overlook this.
The Egyptians at this time commonly took Asiatic, Nubian and even occasianaly European concubines. The Pharoahs DAUGHTER is not what it seems to mean. The Pharoahs had hundreds of offspring from any number of foreign women. Also, this Daughter was not married when she adopted Moses. Furthermore, Moses was brought up by his mother until he was 13 years old. Then you have another problem and that is Moses name itself is Semitic in origin and was given to him by his Egyptian Mother.
The Hebrew word: Mashash means to draw out.
Moses or Mashash was drawn out of the water.
Now why would an Egyptian woman use a Semitic derived name for her child? Perhaps because she was actually Semitic herself and also adopted?
There are other explainations is all I am trying to get you to consider!
fantasies ... please show some legit documentations ....
Moshe ... Mashash 'draw out' as you put it ... lol ... don't you think that it is ironic that ever famous person in the bible is named after an event that was supposed to happen or did happen?
Secondly, where in Egyptian history does it state that Europeans were concubines to the Pharaoh's? Please for the love of sanity ... don't tell me that you believe Grecians and Romans were Europeans ... yet I would love to see ancient ddocumentation that states Egyptian/km.tian Pharaoh's were getting married to Grecians or such ...
Egyptian pharaoh Hatshepsut, she tried to bring in some outsiders but that noise was killed before they even reached the gates ...
Lastly, Moses is a name that many Pharaoh's used ... you know Ah[moses, Thut[moses, etc ...
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Osiriun, where the hell did you ever read that pharaohs took large numbers of Asiatic and white wives. That is pure bullshit and you know it. They never intermarried racially. Nearly all of the Egyptians were pure bloods. What a lie.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Osiriun, where the hell did you ever read that pharaohs took large numbers of Asiatic and white wives. That is pure bullshit and you know it. They never intermarried racially. Nearly all of the Egyptians were pure bloods. What a lie.
If you take the time to read the Amarna letters then you'll see that there were alot of wives given to the pharaos of the 18th dynasty by "Asiatic" kings. It was mostly their daughters they gave away so to strengthen military relationship since Egypt was some kind of superpower during that time and all these "Asiatic" kings were competing against each other for Egypts attention and support.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
Exactly Yonis2 ... but they weren't Grecians or Europeans ...
Posted by Nay-Sayer (Member # 10566) on :
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: [QUOTE]Then you have another problem and that is Moses name itself is Semitic in origin and was given to him by his Egyptian Mother.
Now why would an Egyptian woman use a Semitic derived name for her child?
You are sorley mistaken. Moses is NOT a semetic name. Moses is an Egyptian name as evidenced by the MANY Pharaohs who have taken that name...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Djehuti wrote: ^ Perhaps it would help to ask who is more knowledgeable on ancient Hebrew script, and whoever is cite verification of said claims.
By the way, can Takruri or someone explain to me what sh*hhora w*na'awa and Pirqe de Ribbi Eli`ezer are as it pertains to Jewish script??
^ Can someone answer my questions above?
Posted by Naga Def Wolofi (Member # 14535) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes, came from a people who penned themselves in no uncertain terms; sh*hhora ani w*na'wa (black am I and comely)?
Your wishology -- oh how I wish how I wish the Children of Israel were tawny, not black. Oh pretty please god don't let them be (gasp) black -- is a lie.
So get over it boy. Just face the facts as they are, like the Polish do with their Madonna and baby Jesus (Auset and Hor).
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
Why do so many people here believe the Ancient Hebrews were black? Why couldn't they just have been tawny like the other north Arabians?
I see no evidence of them being black either.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Go to hebrewisraelites.org. That site proves that they were black. You have to look at everything.
Posted by R U 2 religious (Member # 4547) on :
It is only proof if you believe in the biblical Scriptures.
I used to visit the site in 2002 but is there conclusive proof historically. This is the problem with www.hebrewisraelites.org
Such as using Count Constatin de Volney does not say anything for the origins of the ancient Hebrews. What is important to understand is that the Hebrews were mistaken for Egyptians, but that doesn't give historical proof if the bible cannot be taken as historical documentation.
The take on Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Historian, 55-A.D.
quote:Some say that the Israelites were fugitives from the island of Crete, who settled on the nearest coast of Africa about the time when Saturn was driven from his throne by the power of Jupiter.
Evidence of this is sought in the name. There is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida; the neighboring tribe, the Idaei, came to be called Judaei by a barbarous lengthening of the national name.
Others assert that in the reign of Isis the overflowing population of Egypt, led by Hierosolymus and Judas, discharged itself into the neighboring countries.
Many, again, say that they were a race of Ethiopian origin, who in the time of king Cepheus were driven by fear and hatred of their neighbors to seek a new dwelling-place.
To proclaim that they may have had something to do with the Ethiopians or even were a sect of Ethiopians would prove that they were black.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Although some of the things they say is true, I have a hard time believing a cult that believes African Americans are the true Israelites who are superior to those in Africa including Jewish Africans.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Who says that we are superior to Africans? Where did you hear that?
Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
vidavida
A while ago I had no idea about the Jews in Africa, aside from the Biblical episode with/in Egypt.
A good place to start and verify what's written by it's author, but beware. Just as the title is misspelled there are glitches (mostly minor) throughout the essay.
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}: vidavida
A while ago I had no idea about the Jews in Africa, aside from the Biblical episode with/in Egypt.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
No need for a long-winded post about Eurocentric myth-making. I already know about that and never denied it, but you are no different if you deny authentic Classical Greek statues are Greek just because they look European.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
