Black Spirituality Religion : The 12 Tribes : Are we even mentioned?

I don't view everything and everyone within a framework of Kemet so on this particular topic I will stay closer to the Ethiopian/kush/Axumite tradition which was the only nation of people in that region which maintained the matriarchial system dating back to Makeda Nicaule while the others were ruled by competing priesthoods.

According to Ethiopian tradition their birth as a nation begins with Makeda's union with Solomman and the Beta Yisrael who accompanied Menelek back home to Axum.

The Biblical history that you and others refer as myth is largely the same which I refer more specifically as the Ethiopian Chronicles because everyone mentioned in the Bible is in one way or another related to Menelek, who himself is omitted.

My disputation with many Christian on this board is not against Christianity per se because I know it roots but because years ago I began basing my world view on the Ethiopian Chronicles rather that the queen James version.

It was in Ethiopia/Axum/Kush and Nubia that the worship of Auset/Isis continued until the conversion of Ezana who in turn established the Ethiopian Orthodox as a state religion.

However, in the first century AD it was an queen of Kush who ruled when Khrestos was born and the true Lion of Judah was worshiped at that time as Apademak, who was viewed as having primacy over the worship of Amun, while in Kemet Amun had been abandoned in favor of Jupiter, Apollo, Dionysus, etc.



In the Spirit of Sankofa,




.......Gotcha omowalejabali you've made it plain; give me a second to look through some books for a reference which is germane to what you've stated on Ethiopian Chronicles.


Peace In,
 
I don't view everything and everyone within a framework of Kemet so on this particular topic I will stay closer to the Ethiopian/kush/Axumite tradition which was the only nation of people in that region which maintained the matriarchial system dating back to Makeda Nicaule while the others were ruled by competing priesthoods.

According to Ethiopian tradition their birth as a nation begins with Makeda's union with Solomman and the Beta Yisrael who accompanied Menelek back home to Axum.

The Biblical history that you and others refer as myth is largely the same which I refer more specifically as the Ethiopian Chronicles because everyone mentioned in the Bible is in one way or another related to Menelek, who himself is omitted.

My disputation with many Christian on this board is not against Christianity per se because I know it roots but because years ago I began basing my world view on the Ethiopian Chronicles rather that the queen James version.

It was in Ethiopia/Axum/Kush and Nubia that the worship of Auset/Isis continued until the conversion of Ezana who in turn established the Ethiopian Orthodox as a state religion.

However, in the first century AD it was an queen of Kush who ruled when Khrestos was born and the true Lion of Judah was worshiped at that time as Apademak, who was viewed as having primacy over the worship of Amun, while in Kemet Amun had been abandoned in favor of Jupiter, Apollo, Dionysus, etc.


In the Spirit of Sankofa,

`


.......As promised, and from the book shelf are references in support of your statements concerning the Versions, specifically, Ethiopian Chronicles; and how hard it is to totally accept the King James Version.

There are three (3) Versions, which are missing and incomplete that relate to African, Egyptian and Ethiopian influences of the Bible; a Latin Version, a Coptic Version and a Ethiopic Version.

The initial Latin version is called the Old Latin Bible, and believed to be in circulation in Carthage in North Africa as early as AD 250. More importantly, from the surviving fragments, there were two (2) types of Old Latin texts, the African and the European. Needless to say, only the European text was used by the Greeks. The significance of this version is for comparative study against Origen's Hexapla.

The Coptic version was the last stage of the Egyptian language of those living along the Nile River. The earliest translation was in Sahidic in Upper Egypt, and gradually faded out by the eleventh century; leaving only the Bohairic version, the language of the Delta.

The Ethiopic version or Old Ethiopic (called Ge'ez) is of special interest for two (2) reasons; it is the Bible of the Falashas and contains several books not in the Hebrew Apocrypha. Fine examples would be the Book of Enoch and 3 Baruch, known only from the Ethiopic. However, there is nothing extant earlier than the thirteenth century.

On top of that there is the Samaritan Penteteuch we can't get our hands easily because of its location, modern Nablus in Palestine, lol. Its the earliest Hebrew version of the Books of the Law.


Sources:

Price, Ira Maurice. The Ancestry of Our English Bible, 1956.
Weiser, Arthur. The Old Testament: Its Formation and Development, 1968.
Ackroyd, P. R. and C. F. Evans, eds. The Cambridge History of the Bible, Volume I, From the Beginings to Jerome, 1975.






Peace In,
 
I do not think that Ethiopia/Kush as mentioned in the Bible refers to the entirety of Africa and the Middle East. I say this because of the so-called Table of Nations first mentioned in the Book of Genesis.

Punt, Canaan, Mizraim, etc refer to what would be modern Somalia, Palestine and Egypt, and there are more.

It is true that the Greeks used "Ethiopia" much in the same way that we use Africa today, howere, biblically speaking Ethiopia=Kush.

I did not raise this in the other thread, but the "Queen of the South" rising in judgement not only referred to the Queen Makeda, but a dynasty of female rulers who would sit on the throne of Axum and/or Kush/Ethiopia at the time Iyesus Khristos.

In fact, one queen's rule began in the year 1 AD.
I was being so broad lol - totally agree - I think I was trying to give him the easiest answer I could think of but should have spent a little more time with it - nevertheless as he made mention to knowing about Ham & Cush - but me trying to simplify it should have just told him to review Genesis 10 where he would have found Cush, Punt, K`naan and Mizraim under the children of Ham. From this point there are hundreds of tribes which supposedly came from these and many of them the Hebrews had a problem with.

With that also being said geographically what we know today as Africa was much more then what we see on the modern maps. In the bible you have this Shem character whom I don't believe was a reality - I think that Shem (Sham) is none other then Ham so I'm of the opinion that it was the europeans way of trying to split black folks up through scriptural editing.

The answer given to blue is pretty good - I'm going to keep reading
 
I was being so broad lol - totally agree - I think I was trying to give him the easiest answer I could think of but should have spent a little more time with it - nevertheless as he made mention to knowing about Ham & Cush - but me trying to simplify it should have just told him to review Genesis 10 where he would have found Cush, Punt, K`naan and Mizraim under the children of Ham. From this point there are hundreds of tribes which supposedly came from these and many of them the Hebrews had a problem with.

With that also being said geographically what we know today as Africa was much more then what we see on the modern maps. In the bible you have this Shem character whom I don't believe was a reality - I think that Shem (Sham) is none other then Ham so I'm of the opinion that it was the europeans way of trying to split black folks up through scriptural editing.

The answer given to blue is pretty good - I'm going to keep reading



In the Spirit of Sankofa,




.......No sir brotha, no need for this, I already told you that you did a good job. It catches the poster where he is, lol...


Peace In,
 
I was being so broad lol - totally agree - I think I was trying to give him the easiest answer I could think of but should have spent a little more time with it - nevertheless as he made mention to knowing about Ham & Cush - but me trying to simplify it should have just told him to review Genesis 10 where he would have found Cush, Punt, K`naan and Mizraim under the children of Ham. From this point there are hundreds of tribes which supposedly came from these and many of them the Hebrews had a problem with.

With that also being said geographically what we know today as Africa was much more then what we see on the modern maps. In the bible you have this Shem character whom I don't believe was a reality - I think that Shem (Sham) is none other then Ham so I'm of the opinion that it was the europeans way of trying to split black folks up through scriptural editing.

The answer given to blue is pretty good - I'm going to keep reading


Shem of course is Ta Shemu, which essentially is/was Upper Egypt and/or Nubia, but some twist this to label them Asiatic.
 

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