Black Authors : From Babylon to Timbuktu

All of this is to be considered and understood for what it was....the killer is the time frame. Once we look at the emergence of the so called Hebrews, historically we are own our way down hill. All the great advances in technology, medicine, architecture, science and so forth are already old and Kemet is on its way down hill. The history of our people, even from a Biblical perspective is nothing more than a story of conflict and wars with outsiders...resulting in what we have today due to our own people taking them to be more humane than they have demonstrated themselves to be with us and with their own people.

Brother, in all respects, I agree with you for the most part (I have been reading your book more lately, esp. 'The Issue of Abraham')
but to say the history of our people is nothing more than a story of conflict and war with outsiders is not exactly true. Unless of course, Osiris and Horus are 'outsiders' becuase no doubt Set(h) is/was a black Nubian predynastic king, and it was this conflict which led to the unification of upper and lower kindoms and even the defeat of the so called Hyksos led to the consolidation of upper and lower kingdoms. In your book you argue on one hand that Abraham did not exist, and on the other hand that if he did exist that he was white. I have myself argued in a thread here that he did not exist, so I can agree with that argument but what archaeological proof do you posess to prove that he was white? Of course you can provide no such archaeological proof if he did not exist. Yes, the killer is the time frame because during the Rammesid period the Abydos kings list was reconstruced erasing from Truestory many people who now are known to have existed and we know of their existence as a result of more recent archaeological excavation.
 
What proof can you share to substantiate your argument that the "Original Jews were traitors"?

The Atenist were the traitors. Amenhotep IV was replaced. But he had foreign advisers with which "Egypt," if you will, disagreed. Perhaps 'traitor' isn't the best word; but it's an effective word.

I ask this because I find no proof that Akhenaten was "Jewish" or that his followers, or members of his priesthood were "Jewish". I will admit that my position regarding is well documented on this site, and I am less critical than most for numerous reasons which I may get into later, depending on the proof you provide.

It is known that Amenhotep IV wrote "Psalms" of the Bible. Further, some claim that Moses was one of his high priests. One notable claimant is Freud. Notable because it's interesting, not because it's credible. (Actually, I learned yesterday that it's very, very interesting. Freud risked his life during the Nazi take-over to have this transcript for his book delivered intact.)

The synchronization and the stories tell the fuller picture. For instance, Moses was an Egyptian priest; but the Jewish narrative is so anti-Egyptian (Woe they enslaved us and religious persecuation yadda yadda). Yet, "Psalms" comes from Amenhotep IV. It's addition and calculus to me.

Secondly, when you state, "They were chased out of Kemet.", where is the proof of this statement, and what exactly do you mean by "Kemet"? What evidence is there that the territory of Ta-Merita or Ta-Shema were referred to as Kemet" in the late 18th Dynasty?

To the name, I do not have any proof. But it's the Jew's narrative that he was chased from "Egypt." Further, Amenhotep IV and his priests were removed from "Egypt." It's a matter of accepting that Amenhotep IV's followers were the Jews. After all, these were Africans, around the time of the inception of Judaism, who were chased out of "Egypt."

Furthermore, where were these "Original Jews" chased out to?

Well, the Bible says Israel; but also there's Scotland. Basically, they were chased out and they left. Where they went was where they went. No one brought them out. You know--like that old phrase "You don't have to go home but you can't stay here." You can't ask the speaker 'where did you chase those people out to' only 'where did you chase them out of.'

When Akhenaten ascended to the throne, there were two rival priesthoods, one centered in Thebes, the other at Memphis, which represented rival families which had intermarried and held control of the state apparatus. Akhenaten's reforms sought to consolidate the state under a unified government, with the worship/cult center moving closer to the south which is understandable since his mother's family was of Nubian origin.

I must point out that most likely at the time he was not referred principally by the name Akhenaten". His prenomen was Neferkheperure-waenre.

Kheper en Re

As I have argued here before, his attempt to reform the religion and state apparatus was nothin new. The "Aten" was an aspect of Ptah at an earlier stage of the Memphite theology. I think that you may need to look closer at the systhesis which continued during the 19th Dynasty before it collapsed in the late Rammesid period.

Interesting, informed and appreciated. But this reminds me more and more of the Jewish narrative. For it lends to the idea that there were followers of "Judaism" prior to the "Exodus."

As far as your statements concerning the African presence in Europe, the civlization which sprung in the Levant was a result of the outward migration of what has become known as the Grimaldi. I am talkin about people, all of which have origin from the Nubt culture, also known as Nqada, which came out of the celestial waters of Nu (river valley high culture of Nubia and Kush).

No--I mean the Druids of Scotland and Ireland (If I remember correctly, they are chronologically in sync with the "Jewish Exodus.")

Europe and Asia are one continent, yes, but I would consider the Levant more Asian than European.

Besides, I think that the Grimaldi are way ancient people; meaning that they were not responsible for the Levant civilizations. The expansion of Kush, for instance, is much after the Grimandi migrations. Unless you have read differently?

It looks like Grimaldi is some 25,000 + years ago and Kush's expansion is 8,000 + years ago. Though chronology is such a scholar specific field.

Perhaps you are correct in your assertion "that is not the Negro" but it was the Negro who later was part of the Exilarch community held captive in Babylon that is mentioned in the Mishnah, long before any contact with the so-called "EuroJew", because there was no such thing at the time unless you consider the descendants of Kush, the Babylonians as Europeans when clearly the founder of their civilization was a black man, Nimrod.

I was addressing the comment that the Negro comes from Asia. Namely this:

It was from Windsor’s book that I began to scientifically consider the so-called “black race” originating from Asia and not Africa. He quotes a Herbert Wendt, a white German scholar who asserts, “All indications point to the fact that Asia was the cradle of the Black race.” (p.35) Wendt certainly makes some unsettling conclusions in his book It Began in Babel, another good book that is out-of-print.

It doesn't make sense to me. The Negro may be second to the Negrito in age. And we know from where the Negritos come (or I think that we do. :-\)

I'm simply saying that it doesn't make sense. Why would someone think that the Negro comes from outside of Africa? Most people accept that every one comes from Africa and the Negro was the second, if not first, man.

Therefore, the following needs to be examined more closely:

Aten (also Aton, Egyptian jtn) is the disk of the sun in ancient Egyptian mythology, and originally an aspect of Ra.

Neferkheperure-waenre (aka Akhenaten)attempted to restore an ASPECT OF RA which had become submerged and superceeded by rival priesthoods which later held a stranglehood over the Egyptian economy, sending the Nation into chaos and financial ruin.

I see. You are saying that it may have been a more original belief that he was infusing.

I do not know the particulars; you certainly know better than I do; but certainly he did have foreign advisers.

Personally, I do not attach that high respect that others do for "Egypt." From early times it seems a bit more Oriental to me.

I mostly say "Hotep" because I can't speak "Meroitic" and I'm not too sure about learning Ki-Swahili. :)
 
The Atenist were the traitors. Amenhotep IV was replaced. But he had foreign advisers with which "Egypt," if you will, disagreed. Perhaps 'traitor' isn't the best word; but it's an effective word.

It is known that Amenhotep IV wrote "Psalms" of the Bible. Further, some claim that Moses was one of his high priests. One notable claimant is Freud. Notable because it's interesting, not because it's credible. (Actually, I learned yesterday that it's very, very interesting. Freud risked his life during the Nazi take-over to have this transcript for his book delivered intact.)

The synchronization and the stories tell the fuller picture. For instance, Moses was an Egyptian priest; but the Jewish narrative is so anti-Egyptian (Woe they enslaved us and religious persecuation yadda yadda). Yet, "Psalms" comes from Amenhotep IV. It's addition and calculus to me.

To the name, I do not have any proof. But it's the Jew's narrative that he was chased from "Egypt." Further, Amenhotep IV and his priests were removed from "Egypt." It's a matter of accepting that Amenhotep IV's followers were the Jews. After all, these were Africans, around the time of the inception of Judaism, who were chased out of "Egypt."

Well, the Bible says Israel; but also there's Scotland. Basically, they were chased out and they left. Where they went was where they went. No one brought them out. You know--like that old phrase "You don't have to go home but you can't stay here." You can't ask the speaker 'where did you chase those people out to' only 'where did you chase them out of.'

Interesting, informed and appreciated. But this reminds me more and more of the Jewish narrative. For it lends to the idea that there were followers of "Judaism" prior to the "Exodus."

No--I mean the Druids of Scotland and Ireland (If I remember correctly, they are chronologically in sync with the "Jewish Exodus.")

Europe and Asia are one continent, yes, but I would consider the Levant more Asian than European.

Besides, I think that the Grimaldi are way ancient people; meaning that they were not responsible for the Levant civilizations. The expansion of Kush, for instance, is much after the Grimandi migrations. Unless you have read differently?

It looks like Grimaldi is some 25,000 + years ago and Kush's expansion is 8,000 + years ago. Though chronology is such a scholar specific field.

I was addressing the comment that the Negro comes from Asia. Namely this:

It doesn't make sense to me. The Negro may be second to the Negrito in age. And we know from where the Negritos come (or I think that we do. :-\)

I'm simply saying that it doesn't make sense. Why would someone think that the Negro comes from outside of Africa? Most people accept that every one comes from Africa and the Negro was the second, if not first, man.

I see. You are saying that it may have been a more original belief that he was infusing.

I do not know the particulars; you certainly know better than I do; but certainly he did have foreign advisers.

Personally, I do not attach that high respect that others do for "Egypt." From early times it seems a bit more Oriental to me.

I mostly say "Hotep" because I can't speak "Meroitic" and I'm not too sure about learning Ki-Swahili. :)
Again, I ask for archaeoloical evidence to substantiate your numerous claims, especially when you say his priests were removed or chased out. This is totally false. In fact, his successors Ay and Horemheb married his daughters, and it was Ay who actually was the real power behind the throne. The man you call Akhenaten was in actuality a fiurehead who had NO role in the military and only had a ceremonial role in government.

He was no "Jew". You got the historical chronology mixed up and confused with the earlier Hyksos who were defeated prior to the 18th Dynasty.

By the way, what exactly do you mean by "the Negro"? Is that a reference to Ta-Seti? Ta Shemau? Ta Mahu? Ta Nehesu?

As far as your reference to Scotland, please. You don't wanna go there with me unless you done some serious genealoical research which you have decoded and broken down into correct correspondence as I have.
 
Again, I ask for archaeoloical evidence to substantiate your numerous claims, especially when you say his priests were removed or chased out. This is totally false. In fact, his successors Ay and Horemheb married his daughters, and it was Ay who actually was the real power behind the throne. The man you call Akhenaten was in actuality a fiurehead who had NO role in the military and only had a ceremonial role in government.

He was no "Jew". You got the historical chronology mixed up and confused with the earlier Hyksos who were defeated prior to the 18th Dynasty.

By the way, what exactly do you mean by "the Negro"? Is that a reference to Ta-Seti? Ta Shemau? Ta Mahu? Ta Nehesu?

As far as your reference to Scotland, please. You don't wanna go there with me unless you done some serious genealoical research which you have decoded and broken down into correct correspondence as I have.

Lol--we won't go to Scotland. :)

By the by, my e-book collection was destroyed. What related physical books I have is limited. Luckily, the one that opened me to the question is a historical fiction named "Shades of Memnon" by Brother G. He is not an archeologist but a writer. Nevertheless, having spoken to him, I learned that he has a collection of many books and, by his testimony, he has ten years of research on the subject of Memnon and our African past.

That spoken, in his glossary, though unrelated to his book, he mentions the "Kamitic Heresy" [Sic] and the segment reads as follows:

During the last years of the 18th dynasty a new king named Ankhenaten mounted the throne and tried to institute sweeping changes in the religion of the Kamit. Declaring his "Atenist" religion (the worship of the physical sun) the only legitimate faith in Kamit, Ankhenaten built a city and moved thousands of converts to it. In time the Kamitic people rose up in defense of the traditional Ausarian spirituality and dethroned Ankenaten. Then they defeated his chief priest Ausar-Mesh (known biblically as Moses) banishing he and his followers from Kamit. These exiled heretics joined with others from the Middle East to become the biblical Israel, concocting a false history based upon Kamitic history, spirituality and cosmology, including hateful stories about the nation that had banished them.​

On Amenhotep IV's children, I believe that it's a matter of not throwing out the baby with the bath water. His son Tutankhaten inherited the throne and his child's chief priest Aya (non-violently) restored Amenism. The young Pharaoh then 'changed his name' to Tutankhamen. I would follow the above 'glossary term.' Atenism was no longer allowed. Whether Atenists were chased out or not, if it's documented that the revolution was non-violent, and if Atenism is a strict monotheism, the link to Judaism seems clear.

By Negro, I mean the phenotypical West African. I thought that's what it only could mean.

Hotep!
 
I emphatically know that there was no Abraham what so ever....however, for those who choose to believe that there was, there are so called depictions (late ones at that) that he was white, if we accept the pictorial depiction of him in "Civilization or Barbarism" by Diop. Understanding that Diop himself was a Muslim may have swayed his writings when by all right he should have been un-biased if he was going to label himself as a historian and scientist.....but everything, from the writings of ancient Kemet to the Bible states that Abraham never existed.
 

Similar threads

Donate

Support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on Etophil's profile.
Welcome to Destee
@Etophil
Destee wrote on SleezyBigSlim's profile.
Hi @SleezyBigSlim ... Welcome Welcome Welcome ... :flowers: ... please make yourself at home ... :swings:
Back
Top