Black Hebrew Israelite nonsense is just the flip side of the British Israelism/Christian Identity claims. Same crap, different color.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Biblical Evidence Pointing to the True Israelites (Blacks)
- Thread starter Asante
- Start date
If you want to know where all of the stories of Torah (and bible) came from you MUST read the original source which is EGYPTIAN TEXT!
• The Twelve Tribes of Israel never existed.
• Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were characters from Egyptian mythology.
The biblical story of Jacob and Esau, for example, draws together several myths about the Egyptian gods Horus and Set (the feuding twin brothers who fought even in their mother’s womb) and weaves them into a story about biblical patriarchs.
• The first Israelites were Egyptians, followers of Pharaoh Akhenaten, whose attempts to introduce monotheism into Egypt engendered rage among the religious establishment.
• Moses served as chief priest in Akhenaten’s cult and, after Akhenaten’s death, had to flee Egypt to avoid execution.
• Pharaoh Horemheb waged a bitter campaign to eradicate all vestiges of Akhenaten’s heresy, eliminating the evidence stone by stone and word by word. As a result, Akhenaten remained lost to history until nineteenth-century Egyptologists discovered the ruins of his capital city.
• When Horemheb died, Moses returned to Egypt, united his followers with other enemies of Egypt, and attempted to seize the throne from Ramesses I. The coup failed, but to avoid a civil war Moses and his allies were allowed safe passage out of Egypt. This was the real Exodus.
• After entering Canaan, the Egyptian followers of Moses formed military alliances with local Canaanite kings and with some of the recently arrived Greek invaders known as the Sea Peoples. This nontribal alliance of small kingdoms and city-states became biblical Israel.
[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica]Greenberg, Gary, The Bible Myth: The African Origins of the Jewish People, New York: Citadel Press, 1996
[/FONT]
and once again I'll present this:
Philomath
Sadhaka
What does any of this have to do with Exodus not being a historical event?
Yeah, I don't see anything in biblical text or anything biological remotely supporting Eurocentrism. It was once asserted that the ancient Egyptians were non black, and that it was "radical reverse racist Afrocentrism" to say that they were. Well DNA and everything else now confirms that the ancient Egyptians were black. The Lemba of South Africa use to be considered crazy for asserting that they are the original Hebrews (because they are black Africans). DNA now confirms not only have always been telling truth about their history, but their share of the so called "Jewish gene" is higher that seen in general Jewish population.
Along with figures like Moses and Noah being rewrites of earlier characters from Babylonian and Sumerian myths. Next they'll claim that the Sumerians and the Babylonians were black, too.
Ancient Egypt was a mixed society. Some were black and some were brown and later on they were Greek. Who cares, really. None of that has anything to do with black people in America, whose ancestors were West African. If you want authentic African religion, I suggest you start worshiping the West African Vodun (or the Loa, if you want a more African-American experience) and dump the Bible. None of the slaves brought over to America knew anything about the Bible or the Jewish god and a "white Jesus" until it was forced on them by their masters. They were polytheists and animists. The Bible is the book of slave masters who forced it on those they conquered. You aren't doing your ancestors any favors by hyping the slave masters' manual.
It's like Native Americans claiming that they were the original Israelites.
Last edited:
psychoslice
Veteran Member
So what if they were black, pink green or whatever, we use to look like a monkey but we don't now, we have evolved, why worry about how we were in the past, its finished.
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
Yes, there was a direction to the Middle East, which could just as well mean a flux of linguistic, cultural or genetic influence completely unrelated to Jewish culture or ethnicity. Linguistic flux is something people in my part of the world are taught about very early in school, because our language consists of at least three layers of outside languages mixing in with the existing vocabulary. Your map also lacked the most important thing of all: time. If we use the Jewish account, their culture started forming approximately in the 18th century BC. Historically this is really recent, which is why your references to Mesolithic studies have so little significance.
Are you somehow feeling threatened by me? I've at no point made the claim the Jews wouldn't have been speaking a Semitic language, quite the contrary. Your map there shows pretty clearly that the oldest Semitic sources of language are from the Levant, from where it then spread to Mesopotamia and to the African coast via Arabia. Nothing wrong there. On the opposite it shows the Semitic language was developed pretty much where it's still spoken today, i.e. in the Middle East.Unless you're going to argue that Hebrews didn't speak Semitic then I must say that was gotcha fail on your part. Anyways since Christopher Ehrets older maps showing Afro-Asiatic wasn't good enough for you here is a more recent one that he made:
Yep all those arrows are definitely of a black African population source.
I guess I need to come back to my original point. ALL peoples are from Africa, originally. The Middle East was one of the first areas to be settled by a then black population about 100 000 years BC. After that they settled down and developed the characteristics we now think of as Semitic. However you claimed that the Jews came from Egypt, which puts the time frame at about 1200 BC. As said before there is no archaeological evidence for this. The archaeological evidence shows Jewish culture evolved over time from its Canaanite predecessors. This is what I've been trying to get at the whole time. The title of this thread claims there is Biblical evidence the true Israelites were black. The answer is no, they were Semites, more exactly said Canaanites.
Assuming we're talking about modern Israelis, I can believe this, because the European Jews were generally the ones feeling the largest pressure to move into their own state. Elsewhere in the world Jews have also been able to retain their own culture only in a varying degree. Just because modern Jews happen to be of European descent doesn't make them any more Jewish than say their Mesopotamian cousins. Let's not mix superiority with quantity.
So basically you didn't even know that Semitic was a branch of Afro-Asiatic which ultimately originated in Sub Saharan East Africa? If you knew that it a movement of Afro-Asiatic (as the map detailed) then why on Earth would Canaan (Semitic speakers) not be included in the mix?
You made a silly assertion that the Middle East was full of white people and that black people would have been out of place in that region. You have just been proven wrong and in fact the opposite was likely the case. White European like people would have looked out of place.
No just astounded by dishonesty.
So what do you think the first Semitic speakers looked like, since they were coming from a Sub Saharan African source? Please remember that the ARABIC speakers of Israel during this time frame looked like West/Central Africans at the time (Brace 2005, presented on the previous page). Basically you have black people from Africa bringing language and culture to the region (which I imagine was sparsely populated and or largely uninhabited).
Why do you keep lying about this when sources have been presented stating just that:
Not only archaeological but biological evidence tying Israel to black African Egyptians.
The first farmers in the Middle East were Semites (by definition that means spoke a Semitic language) who looked like the Niger-Congo speakers of West Africa, Semite and black are not mutually exclusive terms. Please let's absorb this fact!
Yes, and the original Hebrews were NOT of European descent. HENCE THEY WERE NOT WHITE. The evidence indicates that they were of African descent and were black people just like the ancient Egyptians.
Huey09
He who struggles with God
Sorry to barge into this discussion but could you give me some links on vodun or the Loa please I'm always interested in west african religion hut never knew any names for it.Ancient Egypt was a mixed society. Some were black and some were brown and later on they were Greek. Who cares, really. None of that has anything to do with black people in America, whose ancestors were West African. If you want authentic African religion, I suggest you start worshiping the West African Vodun (or the Loa, if you want a more African-American experience) and dump the Bible. None of the slaves brought over to America knew anything about the Bible or the Jewish god and a "white Jesus" until it was forced on them by their masters. They were polytheists and animists. The Bible is the book of slave masters who forced it on those they conquered. You aren't doing your ancestors any favors by hyping the slave masters' manual.
It's like Native Americans claiming that they were the original Israelites.
No, problem:
West African Vodun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Haitian Vodou - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Louisiana Voodoo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Loa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia's always the best place to start, I believe.
If you did not care then would not have the knee jerk reaction present a baseless fantasy as historical fact! Ancient Egypt was originally black and did not begin to be a "mixed race" society until the break down of the New Kingdom when there irrefutable proof of migration from various people from Western Asia:
Late Dynastic Egyptians was a "melting pot" earlier periods were not.
Well recent genetics test now prove that black Africans from the Great Lakes, South Africa, and West Africa were genetically the closest to the ancient Egyptians. In fact Ramses III and his son were just tested and found to be comprised of E1b1a (West African):
link[FONT=Verdana, Arial]We amplified 16 Y chromosomal, short tandem repeats (AmpF\STR Yfiler PCR amplification kit; Applied Biosystems).........Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓
[FONT=Verdana, Arial]This is the current distribution of that particular haplogroup.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial]The Dnatribes analysis of the results from the above [/FONT]study:
link
[FONT=Verdana, Arial]^Amarna period pharaohs (inludes Tut Btw)
[/FONT]
link
So yes you are completely wrong! West and Central Africans do in fact have genetic, religious, cultural kinship with the peoples of the Nile Valley (which includes Nubia) and this is in accordance with oral tradition of many West African tribes who say that they came from ancient Egypt. In fact the patriarch (Odu Oduwa) of the Yoruba Nigeria's largest ethnic group) is said to have came from ancient Egypt to escape turmoil. The Yoruba have over 100 ancient Egyptian words in their vocabulary (like the Woolf and Ibo) and have numerous religious and social customs identical to that of ancient Egypt. So please wipe your feet before you step to me sir
If you want authentic African religion, I suggest you start worshiping the West African Vodun (or the Loa, if you want a more African-American experience) and dump the Bible. None of the slaves brought over to America knew anything about the Bible or the Jewish god and a "white Jesus" until it was forced on them by their masters. They were polytheists and animists. The Bible is the book of slave masters who forced it on those they conquered. You aren't doing your ancestors any favors by hyping the slave masters' manual.
It's like Native Americans claiming that they were the original Israelites.
Your face after reading the genetic evidence above and realizing that your post trying to covertly trying to degrade black people is really a showing of just how ignorant you are of history and particularly African history:
Oh and btw here is a good that you should read, written by someone who knows what their talking about.. A Ghanian/Akan scholar.
Last edited:
You must be really paranoid if you think that everyone who sees through your garbage is non-black. I'm half black, myself. Why would I want to "degrade" my own ancestors? The only people who are being degrading here are you and your little buddy who is parroting the same crap. You are ignoring the true indigenous cultures and religions of West African peoples and trying to overwrite it with Abrahamic nonsense which was forced on them by foreign conquerors and slave owners. You're the one that's being insulting! You're not interested in truth or debate. You're just here to peddle propaganda.
Last edited:
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
I speak, among other things, an Indo-European language. Does that make me Indian? (The answer is obviously no, it doesn't.) In fact my main language, which isn't Indo-European, has no close relatives in Europe at all other from neighbouring areas just outside the border, and I'm still ethnically fully European - as is the rest of my country's native population. The same goes for the Semitic peoples. Their language arrived, possibly through emigration, to the Levant thousands of years before the Jewish culture started to develop. When we can start talking about Jews the Semitic culture was there already.
In a way this conversation resembles that made of the Celts. We know the Celtic culture was very widely spread in Europe, but we have little evidence of them speaking a common language, for example. In fact the opinions are leaning towards the idea of local populations adapting the Celtic culture instead of anyone ethnically Celtic settling in new areas. Language and ethnicity doesn't go together either.
Would you like to provide evidence of me claiming anything of this sort? I've very clearly stated I'm talking about Canaanites. Is that a problem for you in some way?
So far you've only put words into my mouth where I've clearly been saying something completely else.
I'd imagine they were already very adapted to the environment, since we know the Middle East has been inhabited for a hundred thousand years. In other words they were neither white nor black, but the kind of light brown we currently find in the area. The mistake I see you repeating is the idea that there had to be some kind of physical bulk of people suddenly flowing in from somewhere else. If this was the case, we would know about it and we do know of plenty of wars in the area. What you're practically saying here is that the Canaanite population was in contact with its neighbours, which included, but where by no means limited to Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece. Isn't this pretty obvious?
Okay first of all, this passage is completely taken out of context. I'd also want to see something that isn't from 30 years ago. Don't you have any sources that aren't entirely outdated?
You've yet to provide reliable sources on why Semites would in any way qualify as blacks.
I on the other hand am wondering how you can literally be thinking on complete black-and-white terms. The first farmers lived 6000 years before the Jews. It's perfectly acceptable that some of them might have come from outside the area, but the genetic material would have mixed into the indigenous population long before even the Egyptian high-culture was formed. My main problem with you here is the completely lack of sense of time you constantly are presenting.
I think I'm saying this the third time now: they were neither. Okay?
gilligan8914
Member
According to the Book of Mormon one of the lost tribes of Israel came to the Americas and their decendants are native Americans. So ancient Jews looked like native Americans do now. Obviously not black. Case solved. Its that easy.
Philomath
Sadhaka
There is as much evidence for this as there is for what the OP is claiming.
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
Since it's late for me I'll share a couple of images and then put this away for tonight.
Here's an Egyptian depiction of their neighbouring peoples, found at Medinet Habu. From left to right: Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Shasu Beduin and Hittie.
As you can see the people from the Canaanite area are definitely not black. This is how they looked in the eyes of the Egyptians during Ramses III's time in the 11th century.
Here's a better version one of the so-called Shasu people, who have been suggested as the predecessors of the Hebrews. Still definitely not black:
Here's an Egyptian depiction of their neighbouring peoples, found at Medinet Habu. From left to right: Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Shasu Beduin and Hittie.
As you can see the people from the Canaanite area are definitely not black. This is how they looked in the eyes of the Egyptians during Ramses III's time in the 11th century.
Here's a better version one of the so-called Shasu people, who have been suggested as the predecessors of the Hebrews. Still definitely not black:
gilligan8914
Member
It is strange how skin color seems not to have been a factor back then, and that people referred to each other according to where they were from and their religious beliefs instead of the tint of their skin.