quote:Originally posted by Masonic Rebel: This has the potential to be a good thread Wally in my opinion just need to remove "Hamite" and "Negro"
Due to my Christian upbringing I am surprised about the word Hamite and it true meaning I never knew the true meaning of the word.(I'm shocked)
Define: African people of Caucasoid descent who occupy the Horn of Africa.
Hamite will be removed from my vocabulary along with the word Negro in reference to Race.
Actually Masonic, the original Biblical meaning of 'Hamite' from the Bible simply meant descendants of Ham and was a euphemism for black peoples, particularly Africans. It was Europeans of the late 1800s that changed the definition to mean 'black-skinned caucasoids' [sic] when they realized one of the earliest civilizations in the world began in Africa (Egypt).
That is not true..Ham like Shem and Japeth are just archetypes denoting a three different lineages of the horn of Africa and then out to the "known world" they have nothing to do with "race" nor the people of the WHOLE globe. They are specific lineages only.
Posts: 336 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ham like Shem and Japeth are just archetypes denoting a three different lineages - they have nothing to do with "race"
This is correct. It is also, in scholarship - ethnic religous mythology.
It is not anthropology, and cannot denote the pseudo race classifications of negro, caucasian and mongolian.
It is not linguistics, and therefore cannot validate 'hamito' langauge family.
And if this thread has proven anything it is that mythology *cannot substitute* [via shady semantics] for scientific literacy.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What's ironic and at the same time humorous about Wally's claims of IE being a 'white language' is that the whitest people in Europe (the indigenous Saami of Scandinavia) do not even speak IE languages, whereas some of the darkest (blackest) people in India (like the Sinhalese) do!!
^ Can Wally address the above, or as usual just ignore it and every now and then he will attack our true intelligence and common sense!
He will ignore you, because you are demanding linguistic proof of his linguistic claims, and he has none.
He only had and [incomplete] list for and ill conceived argument, and no follow up to it.
The hope was that the list would confuse [whom?] enough to be seen as relating some 'self evident' truth.
Racial thinking is ultimately rooted in tautology - assuming your conclusion and then mistaking your assumption for *proof* or evidence of your conclusion.
It's a common mistake.
Wally projects learned dogma into his perceptions of the world, and then convinces himself that he is objectively denoting the obvious.
As Djehutu has demonstrated this is not the case.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
While for sure no substitute for modern studies, the Hebrews definitely had some notion of linquistics, or language attached to lineage, in mind in the Table of Nations.
"These are the descendants of Hham, according to their families and languages, by their lands and nations." B*reshiyth 10:20
The Israelites knew enough about "families and languages" to include K*na'an in the NE Africa and Arabian Penisula affiliate Hham.
The Israelites denoted their own language as "the tongue of K*na'an."
From this one example we can see the ancient designations of Hham and Shem don't share a one to one relation with the modern terms Hamite and Shemite.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:From this one example we can see the ancient designations of Hham and Shem don't share a one to one relation with the modern terms Hamite and Shemite.
Agreed.
quote:Wally wrote: There was displayed a racial hierarchy, he discovered; the Black race[ ("family" in the Mdu Ntr would be more accurate)- the Kemetou (Ancient Egyptians) were at the front - consistent with African chauvinism - and the other Blacks next; then came the Semitic races, and at the rear were the White races;
Wally, re-request for the primary text reference for this, if any?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ It seems Wally is out of answers.
Agreed. So let's supply some real answers.
The Km.t, like many other people, did have and ideology whereby they regarded themselves as the Men of Men - Ret n' Rome.
They also had a religous philosophy where themselves and those that they knew were ressurrected in the afterlife.
In the Book of Gates, these people were listed in the order of Rm.t, Aamu, Nshu, and Temehu.'
This ordering reflects the position of these peoples geographically with respect to the sun throughout the day - which is why the book is divided into 'hours'.
Km.t 1st, and then respectively, Aamu in the East, Nsu in the South, and Temehu in the West.
Viewed objectively - and with sanity, none of the above is even remotely similar to western race dogma.
Of course some 17th century Europeans with their cultural blinders in full effect as they plundered non European civilisations created no end of twisted, bizarre, racist interpretations of various ancient civilisations.
That's to be expected.
But how utterly disappointingly facile, to imagine a Black man living in the 21st century, who still filters Km.t through the lens of European racism.
And as long as Wally fails to a make a systematic study of modern anthropology we will continue to make the same mistakes with the same disastrous results [yes, it *was* a disaster Wally!] as this thread has proven to be.
Even very smart people, sometimes make the mistake of choosing to *stop* learning.
And that isn't, well.....very smart. .
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Can Wally address the above, or as usual just ignore it and every now and then he will attack our true intelligence and common sense! 
Printer-friendly view of this topic