Greeks have had contacts with the near east in the first millennium, we have as proof their alpha bet...(as well I have posted the similarities between the two in uta's post), we know this from the defeat of the persians by Alexander the macedonian in 331bc, greek records contain info on these persians as well and their lands which is very similar to today’s iran...maybe you can pull up a map so you can see the land as it is being laid out...

judging by the names of their kings-Cyrus, darius, Xerxes, the conclusion that should be drawn is that the greeks were apart of an "Aryan" nation somewhere near the Caspian Sea...towards the end of the second millennium...they spread westward to asia, eastward to india, and southward to what the Old Testament calls the "lands of the medes and parsees"

the old testament(tanach) speaks of them as part of biblical events...Cyrus for eg. was considered anointed of YHWH, and unusual name for a non-israelite...in the book of ezra cyrus acknowledges that his mission was to rebuild the temple of jerusalem...and stated that he was acting on the behalf of YHWH God of Heaven...Cyrus and other kings of the Dynasty called themselves Achaemenids, after the title adopted by the founder of the Dynasty Hacham Anish, which is a hebrew word meaning wise man...however few have investigated the possibility that YHWH and Achaemenids are the same god...we know that they were both depicted as having eagle wings by both the tanach and royal greek seals, on which achaemenid is depicted as hovering in the skies on a winged globe...

it is documented that Old Persia goes back to the earlier empires of babylon and Assyria whose extent and fall is recorded in the tanach...

the symbols that appear on achaemenid monuments were first thought to be decorative signs, but were renamed cuneiform...

now I can go into achaemenids, but we know that the cuneiform type writing was also found on mesopotamian texts...scholars while studying in northern mesopotamia found near present day mosul, cuneiform inscriptions tat named the place Dur Sharru Kin...the semetic inscriptions were a sister language of hebrew and it meant walled city of the righteous king...we know this king to be King Sargon II....

Following along, the king lived in a royal city whose walls were lined with sculptured bas-reliefs...in the midst of the city is found a Ziggurat, called the Stairway to Heaven By the gods...some ten miles down the tigris river from khorsabad, there was a city called Kuyunjik...this turns out to be the Assyrian capital Nineveh...

this is also told to us by the bible...and has been substantiated by scholars, that indeed the ninveh of the bible is the assyrian city...Nineveh had three great rulers also told to us by the bible...Sennacherib, Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal...
"Now in the fourth year of king Heqekiah, did Sennacherib(senna for short) king of Assyria come up against all the walled cities of Judah" Kings II 18:13...

and when the Angel of the lord smote his army...the verse continues...Sennacherib departed and went back to dwell in Nineveh...

the mounds where Nineveh was buily by Senna and Ashurbanipal revealed paaces, temples and works of art that surpassed those of Sargon…the area where the remains of Esarhaddon’s palaces are believed to lie cannot be excavated for it is now the site of a Moslem Mosque…erected over the spoken about burial place of the prophet Jonah who was said to be swallowed up by a whale…

Ancient greek records show that an officer in Alexander’s army saw a “place of pyramids and remains of an ancient city” a city that was already buried on Alexander’s time…the city turned out to be nimrud, Assyria’s military center…it is there that Slamaneser II set up an obelisk to records his military expedition and etc…

Now on exhibit in The British Museum a list of kings who were made to pay tribute, it lists “Jehu, son of Omri, King of Yisrael.”

Again mesopotamian texts and biblical texts have supported each other, based on this Assyriologists turned to the tenthy chapter of genesis where it states:
“And the beginning of his kingdom, Babel and Erech and Akkad, all in the Land of Shin’ar Out od that land there emanated Ashur where Nineveh was built, a city of wide streets and Khalah and Ressen- the great city which is between Nineveh and khalah…”

when teams dug up the site of the ruins of Ashur, the Assyrian religious center and its earliest capital, of all the assyrian cities mentioned, only ressen has not been found…the name means “horse’s bridle” maybe it was the Royal stable…

at about the same time excavations of Ashur was taking place, diggers were also completing their excavation of Babylon…the biblical Babel…artifacts found told the story of the two competing cities of mesopotamia…Babel and Assyria…one centered in the south and the other in the north…

the two held a high civilization that lasted some 1500 years, both rising circa 1900bc, Ashur and Nineveh were finally captured and destroyed by the Babylonians in 614 and 612 BC respectively…

As told by the biblical prophets, Babylon itself came to its end when Cyrus conquered it in 539BC…

Many museums count the jewelry, statues, utensils,pottery and such other things as the valuable artifacts that were taken from babylon and Assyria, but what is priceless is their texts…their written records include: thousands of cuneiform inscriptions, including cosmologic tales, epic poems, histories of kings, temple records, commercial contracts. Marraiage and divorce records, astronmical tables, astrological forecasts, mathematical formulas, geographiclists, grammar and vocabulary school texts and texts dealing with families, genealogy, epithets, deeds, powers and duties of the gods…

The common language between assyria and babylonia is akkadian…the first know semitic language…close to but predating hebrew, aramaic, pheonician and canaanite…but neither the babylonian texts nor the assyrian claim to have invented the language, many of their tablets actually show the post script that they had been copied from earlier originals…

The question leaves us : who tehn invented cuneifrom and developed the language, it precise grammar and vocabulary? And why did the assyrians/babylonians call the language akkad…

Going back to the book of genesis…“And the beginning of his kingdom, Babel and Erech and Akkad…”
could there really have been such a royal capital, preceding babel and Nineveh???

More to come...I am trying to type it coherently so I am cutting and pasting from a word app...

could there really have been such a royal capital, preceding babel and Nineveh???

Ruins of mesopotamia have provided conclusive evidence that once there indeed existed a kingdom by the name of Akkad…established by an earlier ruler who called himself…Sharrukin- righteous ruler…

He claimed in his inscriptions that his empire stretched, by the grace of Enlil, from the Lower Sea(the persian gulf), to the upper sea(believed to be the mediterranean)…he boasted that “at the wharf of Akkad, he made moor ships” from many distant lands…

Upon this discovery scholars had come upon the discovery of a mesopotamian cilization that existed in the third millenium BC…mounds dug up, brought to light…literature art, science and politics, commerce and communications- a full society that existed before the appearance of Babylon and Assyria…..it becomes obvious that mesopotamian civilizations, assyria and babylonia were branches off of the Akkadian civilization…

Inscriptions recopdring the achievements of Sargon of Akkad state that his full title was King of Akkad, King of Kish….they explained that before he assumed the throne, he had been a counselor to the rulers of kish….

Is there then an earlier kingdom, that of kish which came before Akkad?

Once again we turn to biblical verses…
“And kush begot nimrud
He was first to be a hero in the land….and the beginning of his kingdom: Babel and Erech and Akkad.”
Many scholars have speculated that Sargon of Akkad was the biblical Nimrod, if one reads Kish for Kush it would seem that nimrud was indeed preceded by Kish, as claimed by Sargon…if so then you begin to understand the rest of his inscriptions that state:

“He defeated uruk and tore down its wall…he was victorious in the battle wit the inhabitants of Ur….he defeated the entire territroy from Lagash as far as the sea.”

Is the biblical Erech identical with eth Uruk of Sargon’s inscriptions? As the site is now called Warka was unearthed, that was found to be the case…And the Ur referred to by Sarhon was none other than the biblical Ur, the Mesoppotamian birthplace of Avraham.
Not only does archaeological discoveries vindicate the biblical records, it also appeared certain that there must have been kingdoms and cities and civilizations in Mesopotamia even before the third millenium bc, the question is: How far back does one have to go to find the first civilized kingdom?

The key to that is the key to ulocking yet another language…

Akwaaba

Isn't "Kush" in reference to the nile valley kingdom south of KMT?

Are you saying that "Kish" and "Kush" are the same thing?


Furthermore, something you said in another post (but hey the word for today is : CONSOLIDATE ) was:

"The context in which I read that Dorian invaded egypt, was refferring to mesopotamia not egypt or greece for that matter, so it really doesn't go into much more detail, except that it tell that the israelites invaded can'an at the same time...about 13th century BC...."

Check it:

If the Dorians invaded Egypt at the same time that the Israelites invaded Canaan then when did the Exodus occur?

You also said:

"before 1000 BC David was made king in Israel, shortly after that DOrian invaded Egypt, and 430 years following teh Israelites made their exodus"


This doesn't make any sense to me. According to the Bible, the Exodus occurred BEFORE David was made king of Israel. Before the Exodus THERE WAS NO ISRAEL.

I am have serious trouble understanding the logic here.

Are you saying that there was an ISrael and there was a David, king of Israel BEFORE the Exodus?


Please clear this up for me. I would be greatly appreciative.


SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>Isn't "Kush" in reference to the
>nile valley kingdom south of
>KMT?

no kush is in reference to the mesopotamian
>Are you saying that "Kish" and
>"Kush" are the same thing?
>
No I am spaking of Cush son of Ham son of Noah...his land was named after him...as taken from Genesis 10:6-12.

>
>This doesn't make any sense to
>me. According to the
>Bible, the Exodus occurred BEFORE
>David was made king of
>Israel. Before the Exodus
>THERE WAS NO ISRAEL.

Yes Yisrael was born way before the Exodus...

Yimhotep

>>Isn't "Kush" in reference to the
>>nile valley kingdom south of
>>KMT?
>
>no kush is in reference to
>the mesopotamian
>>Are you saying that "Kish" and
>>"Kush" are the same thing?
>>
>No I am spaking of Cush
>son of Ham son of
>Noah...his land was named after
>him...as taken from Genesis 10:6-12.

I thought those were all the same, the Cush / Kush referred to in the bible was Kush the land south of KMT which Kemites paid homage to.

Shemhotep
************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

==**peace**==

"baby,
I'd draw yuh bath
like Picasso..

pick you,
like fruit
off yuh family tree. &
eatcha' honeydew ass,
wet"

-Giovanni


"the skilled binder uses no strings or knots, while to unloose what he has bound would be impossible." Lao Tzu

"The logic of divide and rule is still valid today." Capleton

"if i'm smart enough to sneak around and learn to fly a plane to get me and all my friends enough false i.d. to board us airplanes to get me and all my friends through metal detectors and past security guards while hiding weapons to make an entire plane load of people afraid of my boxcutter i doubt i would be stupid enough to leave all the evidence behind in a rental car
unless i wanted you to think i was something that i'm not" (c) 2ndsurvivor

DomePoem Poets; Vibe Nation; One ppl under the spoken word

useful links:
news: http://www.blackelectorate.com/links.asp
veg: http://www.vrg.org

.....

"Who need fossil fuel when the sun ain't goin' nowhere"
- Amiri Baraka

http://www.okayplayer.com/guidelines

BUY MY BOOK- only $6! Inbox me for details

>I thought those were all the
>same, the Cush / Kush
>referred to in the bible
>was Kush the land south
>of KMT which Kemites paid
>homage to.

& like g_love said, Kush corresponded w/ part of modern day Ethiopia

I'm confused too...
_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

Glove and lex you are both right...teh cush in teh bible does refer to ethiopians we know this from the account of Queen Sheba in teh tanach that is the well know ethiopian queen...it is stated that Queen Sheba is of ethiopia...


What is even more interesting, which is what I have stated teh first time Iposted to these boards....is that if you follow the line of Noah...Noah had three sons...

Shem, Ham and Japheth...Shem begot the Israelites and Ham begot Cush....the book goes on to say that Ham begot Cush, Mizraim, Put and Cana'an. gen 1 ....The book goes in more detail about Cushites and tells their line which also give us mor elinks to ethiopia...but that is not the interesting part...

what scholars have found is that no where throughout the whole tanach is egypt called by that name...the name egypt simply does not exist in biblical hebrew...in fact...what the hebrews called egypt was Mizraim...

Now stating before that names of lands were attributed to their rulers, or teh people that lived their for example...the Land of Kish/Kush/Cush- named after Cush....the land of Yisrael...named after Yisrael...the land of Mizraim, named after Mizraim...

regardless if you want to look at it that way, if you say that kmtites were not from the seed of Noah, then they weren't from the seed of Kush...it has been proven by scholars and artifacts that indeed the genealogies of genesis, teh places and events did occur with a few discrepancies which are to be expected..

If you say that kmites were not from the tribe of mizraim, what is evident regardless is that Mizraim Noah's second son, did travel to egypt and that is why the tanach refers to egypt as such...we know that teh Kushites traveled south to ethiopia...we know that they were still teher in teh time of Queen Sheba...we know that the tanach refers to egypt as mizraim...

now isn't it possible that the scholars that claim kimtes were from teh seed of cush, were simply mistaken...and actually they were from teh seed of mizraim...it would seem plausible afterall mizraim was cush's brother...it is not a long way to jump...

"We are what we behold and we behold what we are"

Akwaaba

Modern-day Ethiopians (or more specifically mostly Amharic but not the southern most tribes who are culturally more similar to the tribes of Nuba mountains) are mostly descendants of Axumites who in turn stem from the land of Saba (Sheba). There was no "Queen Sheba" only "Queen OF Sheba." The land of Saba was formally found on the Western Coast of the so-called Arabian pennisula. They lived on both the Afrikan and "Arabian" coasts as the water between the two is miniscule.

The Kushitic kingdom fell so by the time that King Ezana(spelling) of Axum moved his people more inland (western) to the areas that were once apart of the Kushitic kingdom around 316 BCE(? i have to go back check this date), the Kushitic kingdom was no more. According to primary sources on the stele of Ezana, Ezan stated that only nomadic tribes were currently in the land whose name he called Noba or Nobatai (have to check this too).

"Ethiopia" is just a general name that was ascribed to the land of Afrika by the Greeks and sometimes in the Bible it is specifically in reference to Kush like the passage where Tirhaka (king of Kush and KMT during Kushitic Dynasty 28?th of KMT) in the Bible. Don't know the passage off the top of my head but I can find it for you if necessary.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>Modern-day Ethiopians (or more specifically mostly
>Amharic -

Amharic is the name of their language it is not what they are called, sort of like hebrew is a language and Yisrael is what they ar called...

but not the southern
>most tribes who are culturally
>more similar to the tribes
>of Nuba mountains-

Do you have a map infront of you preferably an old one? If not here are some links to show you, but these are modern maps yet they give you an overall feel of what I am speaking of, I have copies of some old maps, but I'm afraid I don't have a way to get you any...
at this site you get an idea of the arabian peninsula...teh "so-called" is actually the whole country...
http://www.graphicmaps.com/webimage/countrys/asia/arabian.htm

this next one will show you where ancient kush is located...now on my map...teh Area of sudan, ethiopia and possibly, chad the unamed country(the one you can't make out), kenya and somalia were all ancient Kush....this is where the Nuba mountains are located...
http://fga.freac.fsu.edu/maps.html

Now if what you say below is true then you have proven without a doubt that the land of Kush/ethiopia(I have no disagreement that name is a western name) did belong to the Kushites...

It's important that when you name these countries you have with you a modern and an ancient map to see for youself how the land was mapped out...this takes care of this part here

>The land of Saba was
>formally found on the Western
>Coast of the so-called Arabian
>pennisula. They lived on
>both the Afrikan and "Arabian"
>coasts as the water between
>the two is miniscule.


) are mostly
>descendants of Axumites

who were the axumites, where do they trace their seed back to...

who
>in turn stem from the
>land of Saba (Sheba).
>There was no "Queen Sheba"
>only "Queen OF Sheba."

yes this is true, yet that is her common name...and as you have proven, it was no need to go into that detail because as you have mentioned it was of Sheba...

now since you bring that up...are you awar of what Sheba or Saba means...are you aware of what kind of language the name is...are you aware that it is a semetic word, more specifically the name of one of Cush's sons...

back to gen 1 Cush begot Saba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca...and the Sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan....

Again you help me show that as I have said before that land were named after the rulers and as you have stated that the land was also called Sheba...as I have stated that the land where the modern day ethiopians(some of it) was the land of Kush also...it makes perfect sense...

finally we are rounding it off...

The land was called Sheba because it had seven different regions...but whatis important to understand is that the word Sheba and Saba are both hebrew words...

Like you have stated...

>The Kushitic kingdom fell so by
>the time that King Ezana(spelling)
>of Axum moved his people
>more inland (western) to the
>areas that were once apart
>of the Kushitic kingdom around
>316 BCE(? i have to
>go back check this date),

Yes I'm not sure this date is correct, for the Kushites were still inhabiting the land at the time of Alexander teh great...we know this from his texts and accounts of history...I believe isn't that sometime circa 300 bc...so it can't be possible that they were not still in that land...

maybe if we can find the time of King Ezana's rule..and what tribe was he from as well...this would help me locate the time of his rule...

>the Kushitic kingdom was no
>more. According to primary
>sources on the stele of
>Ezana, Ezan stated that only
>nomadic tribes were currently in
>the land whose name he
>called Noba or Nobatai (have
>to check this too).


yes I'm not sure, I've heard his name before, but I doubt that his accounts are in the right time frame...

needless to say by ethiopian/kushite, greek, shumerian, and hebrew records...teh land of Kush and its people were still inhabiting that land way after the birth of King Solomon...which puts them in the late 100's bce...

>"Ethiopia" is just a general name
>that was ascribed to the
>land of Afrika by the
>Greeks and sometimes in the
>Bible it is specifically in
>reference to Kush like the
>passage where Tirhaka (king of
>Kush and KMT during Kushitic
>Dynasty 28?th of KMT) in
>the Bible. Don't know
>the passage off the top
>of my head but I
>can find it for you
>if necessary.

not sure what you mean here, if you mean that ethiopia is kush in the bible, then yes I have stated that...

Akwaaba

I think the discrepancy in the date is the CE thus it should by 316 CE not BCE. I will be sure tomorrow.

Anyways

>>Modern-day Ethiopians (or more specifically mostly
>>Amharic -
>
>Amharic is the name of their
>language it is not what
>they are called, sort of
>like hebrew is a language
>and Yisrael is what they
>ar called...
>

Amharic is the language which is the language of a dominant tribe of Ethiopians called the Amhara tribe.

Some other points:

Axumites stem from Saba as I stated before.

Somalia was the land of Punt and not Kush according to texts written during the time of Queen Hatshepsut of KMT.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

hmmmm that makes perfect sense....that the reign of teh kushite empire did not fall until after christ....then it would place the kushites in their land during the reign of

maybe we can agree on this one...their brother...Mizraim in egypt...indeed the land did all belong to these people....


and don't let my statement be purely definitive, no we must assume taht indeed they had immigrants, migrators and etc...even the land and its borders changed and twisted by the time yisrael arrived their...with invaders wars by the hyskos and such...it makes perfect sense...

I hope finally you are seeing what I see...

Akwaaba

Is the year of Ezana's westward expansion of Axum.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

Akwaaba


"before 1000 BC David was made king in Israel, shortly after that DOrian invaded Egypt, and 430 years following teh Israelites made their exodus"

This still makes no sense if one is to go by the Old Testament (Tanach). According to the Old Testament, the Exodus predicated king David. The Exodus and everything(one) that comes from it (Moses,Ten Commandments, plagues on Egypt) are the foundation which Israel the state was founded upon and of which David was made king.


SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

the footnotes point out certain anachronisms that were added after the original had been written.

so maybe the confusion comes from halleluyah reading a passage that had David's (or some other) name added in at a later date?

_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

The answer to this will come in a few...the Dorian invasion did happen at the time of the Israelite invasion of cana'an...

there's a footnote at the beginning of Exodus 13:17 ("the departure of the Israelites) which reads:

"the route taken by the exodus and the precise stages of the jouney are extremely difficult to determine. v. 17 notwithstanding* a certain number of names tend to indicate a northern route, that is to say, through 'the Philistines' territory' (which term, however, is an anachronism). there would seem to be traces of two literary traditions here, preserving the memory of two historic facts, the duplicate itineraries corresponding to the exodus of two distinct groups"


*Exodus 13:17 reads: "When Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not let them take the road to the Philistines' territory, although that was the shortest 'in case', God thought, 'the prospect of fighting makes the people a roundabout way through the desert of the Sea of Reeds."

there are additional footnotes within that passage...I'll post those if you're interested.

_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>
>*Exodus 13:17 reads: "When Pharaoh had
>let the people go, God
>did not let them take
>the road to the Philistines'
>territory, although that was the
>shortest 'in case', God thought,
>'the prospect of fighting makes
>the people a roundabout way
>through the desert of the
>Sea of Reeds."
>


that this verse means...I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to point out...

that they did not go the shortest way or sommething else...

In the tanach, in it's hebrew it does state that the people did not the shortest way and it also states why, however an anachronism is like a relic, a survivor, a left over of sorts so what is it exactly are the footnotes saying...


also like i have mentioned before...when naming places don't go by these modern maps, one should find an older map or better yet an ancient map in order to see where was what as well to account for land and water massess at the time...

>>*Exodus 13:17 reads: "When Pharaoh had
>>let the people go, God
>>did not let them take
>>the road to the Philistines'
>>territory, although that was the
>>shortest 'in case', God thought,
>>'the prospect of fighting makes
>>the people a roundabout way
>>through the desert of the
>>Sea of Reeds."
>>
>
>
>that this verse means...I'm not sure
>exactly what you're trying to
>point out...

I just posted the verse for clarity since the note makes reference to it.

I was just pointing out some of the difficulties in following the Exodus based on biblical dates, etc. As the note said, the word "Philistine" was unknown at the time the original was written, so someone had to go back and add it later. Overall, there is the suggestion, as the note says, that the "exodus" may have occurred in 2 separate periods or among 2 separate groups, since it is difficult to connect to other historical records of the time.


>In the tanach, in it's hebrew
>it does state that the
>people did not the shortest
>way and it also states
>why,

1. the bible was not only translated from hebrew
2. any strictly hebrew translation is going to state the history/occurrances from a strictly hebrew point of view. there's nothing wrong with that, but it is subjective & not necessarily historically accurate.


>however an anachronism is
>like a relic, a survivor,
>a left over of sorts
>so what is it exactly
>are the footnotes saying...

(from http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=anachronism)

a·nach·ro·nism (-nkr-nzm)
n.

1.The representation of someone as existing or something as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order.
2.One that is out of its proper or chronological order, especially a person or practice that belongs to an earlier time: “A new age had plainly dawned, an age that made the institution of a segregated picnic seem an anachronism” (Henry Louis Gates, Jr.)


>also like i have mentioned before...when
>naming places don't go by
>these modern maps, one should
>find an older map or
>better yet an ancient map
>in order to see where
>was what as well to
>account for land and water
>massess at the time...

I understand what you're saying, but the point is, the word/place name "Philistine" wasn't in existence when the original text was written, but it is there nonetheless. As the Bible has gone thru different translations & languages, people have gone back and added information and taken information out.

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>I was just pointing out some
>of the difficulties in following
>the Exodus based on biblical
>dates, etc.

Also egyptologists and historians have been able to decipher through the seemingly mixed up biblical dates, but it was not solely through the help of the tanach it was alos with the help of excavated cites of other cities and what they found their as well as artifacts and slabs found...the reason why the bible's dates are confusing to modern day scholars is because they do not hab=ve access to those artifacts or have not searched out those artifacts to cross reference those with teh dates in teh bible...

but it has been proven that for 3 and 4 year discrepancies the bible as well as greek and egyptian accounts, cites dug up and carbon dating that the dates in teh bible go along with the dates of other events that took place in history...please read what I wrote...

because I feel that if you read you would now have the knowledge that the books you are reading has you confused about...

As the note
>said, the word "Philistine" was
>unknown at the time the
>original was written, so someone
>had to go back and
>add it later.


Actually this is incorrect as you will find, the land of teh philistines was orginally called Philistia, by its people, tehn philistine, then palestine....

When scholars say that philistine did not exist, they are actually speaking of Palestine...and no technically the word palestine did not exist....but Philistia did....

This is why I say you cannot go singularly on what one book says, much less a modernized book of an original ,first you must consult the original to find teh true meaning then you cunsult other texts....based on what you have found from that singlar text ofcourse it would look incomplete but when completed by other texts you see its fulness...

As well to more clarify the poiont as your scholars and yourself have noted in another post...the road to can'an through philistia was heavily endrenched with military and war zones, but it was not of egyptian people, it was of teh people of Philistia, therefore Moses did not klead them through there for fear that the people would be frightened and turn on their heels
back to egypt..

Overall, there
>is the suggestion, as the
>note says, that the "exodus"
>may have occurred in 2
>separate periods or among 2
>separate groups, since it is
>difficult to connect to other
>historical records of the time.

Maybe, however there are no records of such, and there have been records of one exodus that happened at a particular time....


like I said this scholar is speaking from an obvious ignorant perspective, because like I said there are artifacts, and historical accounts that do connect the bible with other events and that is what must be read in its entirety not just the bible alone...

Present day scholar have the tendency to look at the bible alone instead of other texts, or use their starting point of research as the bible...but that is faulty, instead your starting point should be the beginning of creation and work yourself down from teher, that is why it is important to conduct biblical or any kind of historical research by first beginning with teh first civilization...

>
>
>>In the tanach, in it's hebrew
>>it does state that the
>>people did not the shortest
>>way and it also states
>>why,
>
>1. the bible was not only
>translated from hebrew

The tanach is teh original Old Testament written in biblical hebrew...teh Old Testament is a book for Israelites, just like teh Qur'an is a book written for Ishmaelites...

so this statement makes no sense....teh new testament is a completely different book from the old testament...it is like someone got essence and jet and put them in the same magazine and called them essence....so again don't be confused between the two...


>2. any strictly hebrew translation is
>going to state the history/occurrances
>from a strictly hebrew point
>of view. there's nothing wrong
>with that, but it is
>subjective & not necessarily historically
>accurate.

Actually, as the records have stated, the story may be about israelites, but the dates have all lined up with other historical events...again Iurge you to please read my posts, then you wouldn't be so confused...


>I understand what you're saying, but
>the point is, the word/place
>name "Philistine" wasn't in existence
>when the original text was
>written,

actually that is not correct, the world palestine did not exist, teh word philistia and philistine did exist...and it existed in biblical hebrew nonetheless.


but it is there
>nonetheless. As the Bible has
>gone thru different translations &
>languages, people have gone back
>and added information and taken
>information out.

and to this point as I have stated previously, an intact torah has proof that it has been changed, because when reading it in hebrew the meanings and teh beat of how it is read becomes off....so no man can make changes to it without someone who speaks hebrew knowing...

I'm not taking anything these notes say as the absolute final truth. As I said, I'm just typing what they wrote, straight, no chaser. note the quotation marks.

I have my own research to do. I am not an expert. I don't claim to be.

So far I have put only ONE inference of my own onto what these notes have said (which, by the way, were compiled by several scholars, not just one....another reason I bought it).

If you've got issues w/ their histories, write Doubleday.

And please start giving some sources you've been studying. I understand you're stating a composite of facts from things you've read, but you had to read them somewhere first. Any authors you'd suggest? We're all just trying to understand what's up.

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

Exodus 13:17 reads: "When Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not let them take the road to the Philistines' territory, although that was the shortest(1) 'in case', God thought, 'the prospect of fighting makes the people a roundabout way through the desert of the Sea of Reeds(2)."


(1) "The normal highway running parallel with the coast and going by way of Sileh (the modern el-Kantara); there are wells and military posts at intervals along its course. The fugitive group certainly did not take it. The group driven out of Egypt may have done so. On it, the three geographical names mentioned in 14:2 may most convincingly be sited, but the flight-Exodus, being the more important, has assimilated memories from the other tradition."

(2) "The words 'the Sea of Reeds', in Hebrew yam suph, are additional. The original text gave only a general indication: the Isralites took the desert route, to the east or south-east. The meaning and location of what is termed 'the Sea of Suph' are uncertain: it is not mentioned in the ch. 4 narrative, which only speaks of 'the sea'. The sole ancient text to mention the 'Sea of Suph' or 'Sea of Reeds' (translating the Egyptian term--see also the phrase in Numbers 21:4) is 15:4, which is poetic.

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>
>(1) "The normal highway running parallel
>with the coast and going
>by way of Sileh (the
>modern el-Kantara); there are wells
>and military posts at intervals
>along its course. The
>fugitive group certainly did not
>take it. The group
>driven out of Egypt may
>have done so.

Let's get back to what historical records state, if there was a fugitive group, it did not leave before the group that was allowed out...as well, the land that was endrenched in military was not solely military of egypt, it was also the military of the people of philistine....these we know are from teh seed of Ishmael...these people were fighting amongst each other and with teh egyptians....as well their land is much further north than right next door to egypt...so egypt's military was not heavy(deep) in Philistia...


>(2) "The words 'the Sea of
>Reeds', in Hebrew yam suph,
>are additional.

this is blaspheme taht is not what it says in hebrew...simply that

The original
>text gave only a general
>indication: the Isralites took the
>desert route, to the east
>or south-east.

this is true and if you look on a map today what is south-southeast of egypt what sea is...there is your prook, if teh israelite did not go north, they could not have gone west....which leaves two more indications...now teh bible states that they went through a desert in the wilderness, we know this to be the arabian desert....

therefore if you look on a map any map...the only route is to go over the red sea...that is the only way to get to the arabian desert...from egypt...

it's simple, read what your scholars say and then look at a map, then draw your own conclusions, it's not hard, it's common sense, but these scholars(reasonwhy I don't like these new age schoars) assume that people don't have common sense to look and find out for ourselves that what they are saying is wrong...


The meaning
>and location of what is
>termed 'the Sea of Suph'
>are uncertain: it is not
>mentioned in the ch. 4
>narrative, which only speaks of
>'the sea'. The sole
>ancient text to mention the
>'Sea of Suph' or 'Sea
>of Reeds' (translating the Egyptian
>term--see also the phrase in
>Numbers 21:4) is 15:4, which
>is poetic.


and thsi is even more proof of that....can you find the sea of reeds on a map...teh sea of reeds is actually a mote, a wading lake liek one found at the shore of a river, it was like a swamp....as well....

Historians and diggers with diving teams have recovered from teh red sea ampng other things, helmets and horses bones, chariot wheel holders(the metal that hold the spokes and makes the wheel) at the bottom of the red sea so this is a misinterpretation...

I would invest in an hebrew englis tanach, a copy of the hebrew alphabet and start teaching myself how to read hebrew to see for myself, it's not hard, I did it...

>>(2) "The words 'the Sea of
>>Reeds', in Hebrew yam suph,
>>are additional.
>
>this is blaspheme taht is not
>what it says in hebrew...simply
>that

what's blashpheme? the translation? "yam suph", they're saying, are the original Hebrew words. that probably would have been clearer if there were italics on this thing...

so what are some possible translations for those 2 words?


>therefore if you look on a
>map any map...the only route
>is to go over the
>red sea...that is the only
>way to get to the
>arabian desert...from egypt...
>

that's fine. the only thing the notes are dealing w/ are discrepancies in translation. they're not saying the 'sea of reeds' ISN'T the red sea, only that, based on the words that are there, they can't definitively say it IS.


>it's simple, read what your scholars
>say and then look at
>a map, then draw your
>own conclusions, it's not hard,
>it's common sense, but these
>scholars(reasonwhy I don't like these
>new age schoars) assume that
>people don't have common sense
>to look and find out
>for ourselves that what they
>are saying is wrong...

I'd say they're doing just the opposite. I'd rather them state it like that than translate it "the red sea" & be done with it. How would I know it was really the red sea?

They're just pointing out translation issues & letting it go at that.

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>>>(2) "The words 'the Sea of
>>>Reeds', in Hebrew yam suph,
>>>are additional.
>>
>>this is blaspheme taht is not
>>what it says in hebrew...simply
>>that
>
>what's blashpheme? the translation? "yam suph",
>they're saying, are the original
>Hebrew words. that probably would
>have been clearer if there
>were italics on this thing...
>


No blaspheme is that those words were not what was written...

>there's a footnote at the beginning
>of Exodus 13:17 ("the departure
>of the Israelites) which reads:
>
>
>"the route taken by the exodus
>and the precise stages of
>the jouney are extremely difficult
>to determine. v. 17 notwithstanding*
>a certain number of names
>tend to indicate a northern
>route, that is to say,
>through 'the Philistines' territory' (which
>term, however, is an anachronism).
> there would seem to
>be traces of two literary
>traditions here, preserving the memory
>of two historic facts, the
>duplicate itineraries corresponding to the
>exodus of two distinct groups"
>
>
>
>*Exodus 13:17 reads: "When Pharaoh had
>let the people go, God
>did not let them take
>the road to the Philistines'
>territory, although that was the
>shortest 'in case', God thought,
>'the prospect of fighting makes
>the people a roundabout way
>through the desert of the
>Sea of Reeds."

Actually in my tanach, exodus 13: 14-17 states:

"And YHWH said unto Abraham after Lot(his brother) was separated from him, lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, Northward and Southward and eastward and westward, for all teh land which thou seeth to thee I will give it and to thy seeds forever. And I will make thy seeds as thy dust of the earth, so that if a man can number the dust of the earth then shall thy seeds also be numbered, arrive walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it for unto thee I will give it."

^this is what the tanach says about exodus 13: 14-17 so perhaps you got the verses mistaken with something else..

as well the sea that Moses parted was - the Red Sea-that begins in exodus 14 Exodus 15:4 talks about the Red Sea...and this is actualy stated in the hebrew as Edom eretz mayem...meaning red land water...interestingly enough this is southeast of egypt...

>Actually in my tanach, exodus 13:
>14-17 states:

what you quote below this is Genesis 13:14-17. Exodus 13:14-17 is something TOTALLY different.

I only mentioned the verse in Exodus as an example to Solarus about the anachronisms present in certain translations. It didn't have anything to do with anything you had previously said.

But either way, we were talking about Egypt & the Exodus, right? Where does Genesis come in?


>"And YHWH said unto Abraham after
>Lot(his brother) was separated from
>him, lift up now thine
>eyes, and look from the
>place where thou art, Northward
>and Southward and eastward and
>westward, for all teh land
>which thou seeth to thee
>I will give it and
>to thy seeds forever. And
>I will make thy seeds
>as thy dust of the
>earth, so that if a
>man can number the dust
>of the earth then shall
>thy seeds also be numbered,
>arrive walk through the land
>in the length of it
>and in the breadth of
>it for unto thee I
>will give it."

again, this is GENESIS 13:14-17. But mine says the same.


>as well the sea that Moses
>parted was - the Red
>Sea-that begins in exodus 14
>Exodus 15:4 talks about the
>Red Sea...and this is actualy
>stated in the hebrew as
>Edom eretz mayem...meaning red land
>water...interestingly enough this is southeast
>of egypt...

My Exodus 15:4 mentions the "Sea of Reeds" again: "Pharaoh's chariots and army he has hurled into the sea; the pick of his officers have been drowned in the Sea of Reeds..."

I'm not saying the "Sea of Reeds" ISN'T the Red Sea (I haven't done the geographical homework to prove/disprove otherwise), but I'm sure they would have stated as much in the other notes. Apparently, it's unclear what the "Sea of Reeds" is. Considering the time period, it could have been a body of water that has long since dried up.

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

yeah I know, I don't have my tanach so I had to call my sister, she doesn't speak english so she got it mixed up, then I spoke to her husband who clarified it for me...

Sorry if i jump in and make no sense

I remember that sometime before wbgirl deleted all posts, in a post called "Black?" i translated a long article i found in National Geographic (norwegian) about the ancient "Axum"/"Aksum" kingdom, said to be the first christian kingdom. According to the article, Makeda, the queen of a kingdom in what today is Ethiopia and Eritrea, travelled to Solomon and had a son with him (les nubian's song "Makeda" is about it). When the son grew up and had become a young man in Solomon's care, he travelled back to his mother. Solomon was so found and proud of his son that he ordered that his wise men's young sons would follow Makeda's son back to his mother. According to the legend, one of the wise men's sons stole the Arc of Covenant. Makeda's son didn't learn this until they were well into their travel, and then the Arc of Covenant came to Axum.

I tried to find the url to an article i linked to in that post, and found it:
http://www.webstories.co.nz/focus/etiopia/ark.html

...and many other sites too:
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/CIVAFRCA/KUSH.HTM
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/CIVAFRCA/AXUM.HTM
http://www.sacredsites.com/africa/ethiopia.html
http://www.marekinc.com/CultureartsINT062401.html
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/nubia1.html

░▒▓█▌¹♥▐█▓▒░

proud okayphotographer: http://www.okayplayer.com/okayphotographers/

"Most of our assumptions have outlived their uselessness." — Marshall McLuhan

Names have a meaning in mostly every language, but particularly in those of Near Eastern cultures…

All the Akkadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian names of persons andplaces had a meaning, but the names of rulers that preceded Sargon of Akkad did not make sense at all: the king at whose court Sarhon was acounselor was called…Urzababa…the king who reigned in Erech was named Lugalzagesi and etc…

Taking another lok at Akkadian inscriptions…one will find that the Akkadian cuneiform script was syllabic…each sign stands for a complete syallable(ab, ba, bat and etc)

Yet the script made extensive use of signs that were not phonetic syllables, but conveyed the meanings “god, city, country or life, exalted and etc…the only explanation one is left with is that these signs were remains of an earlier writing method which used pictographs…akkadian then, must have been prceded by another language tha tused a writing method similar to egyptian heiro’s…

It soon becomes obvous that an earlier language and not just an earlier writing is involved…studies show that Akkdian inscriptions and texts made extensive use of loan words, words borrowed intact from another language…much like an israelite woul dborrow the word auto bus…because auto bus simply does not exist in hebrew…
This was especially true where science, technology and works pertaing to gods were involved…
One of the greatest findings of Akkadian texts was the ruins of a library assembled in Nineveh by ashurbanipal; some 25,000 tablets were found many of which described by the ancient scribes as copies “of olden text” a group of twenty three tablets ended with the statement: “23rd tablet: language of Shumer not changed.”…another text bore a statement by Ashurbanipal himself…:

“The god of scribes has bestowed on me the gift of the knowledge of his art. I have been initiated into the secrets of writin. I can even read the intricate tablets in Shumerian, I understand the enigmatic words of the stone carvings from the days before the flood.”

This claim of happening before the days of the flood increases its mystery, we also know that the French Society of Numismatics and Archaeology give recoginition to pre-akkadian language and its people, but they mislpelled the word…they called it Sumer… now if we go to the bible we see…that Sumer/Shumer was not a far away and distant land, it indeed was an early name for southern mesopotamia, just as the book of genesis had clearly stated: The royal cities of Babylon and Akkad and erech werein the land of Shin’ar.(Shinar is the biblical name for Shumer)

here is where I need help...


who is Ptah? anyone have any accounts of his records...?

what is Pithom and Raamses...?
Also what do records show of these places?

Who was thotmes I(1525-1512BC) was his rulership of egypt...?

Anyone ever calculate when Moses was born? I have calculations of Moshe and copies of inscription of decrees made by thotmes...

please note that his rulership ended...a year after moshe was born...

After that, maybe you can help me find other info about thotmes the II his length of reign, and thotmes III and his length of reign as well...

who was hatshepsut? this is a female...

Perhaps we can come together on this one with the info I have and teh info you have...nothing like piecing the clues together...

Akwaaba

How can David exist BEFORE the EXODUS and thereby MOSES?

this goes against the chronological order of the Bible

"before 1000 BC David was made king in Israel, shortly after that DOrian invaded Egypt, and 430 years following teh Israelites made their exodus"

Please explain.

"Ptah" is a NTR and not an actual "person."


SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

Akwaaba

>what is Pithom and Raamses...?
>Also what do records show of
>these places?

Pithom? <- that spelling right?

Ramses was the named of several different rulers of KMT (Ramses I, Ramses III, Ramses II, etc.) that one finds during the "Rameside" Dynasty

>
>Who was thotmes I(1525-1512BC) was his
>rulership of egypt...?

Don't understand this question. Thutmose I was father of Hatshepsut

>
>Anyone ever calculate when Moses was
>born? I have calculations of
>Moshe and copies of inscription
>of decrees made by thotmes...

Who is Moses?

>
>
>please note that his rulership ended...a
>year after moshe was born...
>

Huh?

>
>After that, maybe you can help
>me find other info about
>thotmes the II his length
>of reign, and thotmes III
>and his length of reign
>as well...
>

Thutmose III ruled after Hatshepsut from 1468-1436 BCE. During his reign KMT established hegemony over Syria.

>who was hatshepsut? this is a
>female...

ruler of KMT from 1490 to 1468 BCE. Daughter of Thutmose



>Perhaps we can come together on
>this one with the info
>I have and teh info
>you have...nothing like piecing the
>clues together...

Perhaps...



SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>Akwaaba
>
>>what is Pithom and Raamses...?
>>Also what do records show of
>>these places?
>
>Pithom? <- that spelling right?


yes maybe you can check Pi- Tom...you have to give lee way for the h in words...semetic languages are known to use and h while others are not...

>
>Ramses was the named of several
>different rulers of KMT (Ramses
>I, Ramses III, Ramses II,
>etc.) that one finds during
>the "Rameside" Dynasty


Yes I know this one, but more specifically Rameses...this is the name of a city not a person...

>>
>>Who was thotmes I(1525-1512BC) was his
>>rulership of egypt...?
>
>Don't understand this question. Thutmose I
>was father of Hatshepsut


yes I meant thutmose...

>>Anyone ever calculate when Moses was
>>born? I have calculations of
>>Moshe and copies of inscription
>>of decrees made by thotmes...
>
Who is Moses?

Have patience I would not have brought you this far without something instore for you, to let you in I'm just simply searching for the disk that has the info on it ....>
>>
>>
>>please note that his rulership ended...a
>>year after moshe was born...
>>
>

Thutmose I rulerhip ended a year after Moses was born?

>
>Thutmose III ruled after Hatshepsut from
>1468-1436 BCE. During his
>reign KMT established hegemony over
>Syria.


I follow you here, but you have the dates mixed up...thutmose III died in 1450 bc...and was followed on teh throne by Amenophis II...his reign lasted from 1450 to 1425 bce

>>who was hatshepsut? this is a
>>female...
>
>ruler of KMT from 1490 to
>1468 BCE. Daughter of Thutmose

Hatsheput reigned after her father died...she was the daughter of his official spouse thus giving her the title of "teh kings daughter" as backed up by both exodus and teh texts of scholars...

she reigned from 1512 bc till and perhaps you can help me here or someone else can... the rulership of her half brother thutmose II...he died after a short reign which ushered in thutmose III the son of an egyptian harem girl...and thutmose the II...

Yimhotep

Perhaps u meant Ptahotep?

Shemhotep

************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

Let’s start at 963 BC, the year in which Solomon assumed the kingship in Jerusalem… the book of kings states that Solomon began the construction of the temple in the fourth year his reign completing it in his eleventh year…Kings I 6:1 also states:

“It came to pass in the four hundred and eitheieth year after the children of Yisrael came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel… that he began to build the house of YHWH”

This statement is supported(with a slight difference) by the priestly tradition that there had been twelve generations of priests of forty years each, from the exodus to the time when Azariah “executed the priestly offive in the temple that Solomon built in jeruslamen.” (I Chronicles 5:36)

Both sources agree on the passageo of 480 years, with this diffreence, one counts from the start of the temple’c constrction(960 BC and the other from its completion(in 953 BC) when the priestly services could begin… And alas, SOLARUS what you have been getting at for quite some time, this would then set the Israelite exodus from egypt in either 1440 or 1443BC…the latter date has been proven to offer better synchronization with other worldly events…

Founded on the artifacts, cite excavations, numerous texts and etc…found at the beginning of this century, both egyptologists and biblical scholars worked together to reach the conclusion that eth exodus had indeed takenplace in the middle of the 15th century BC….but that wasn’t completely agreed upon by the scholars, who set the date at 13th century bc based on canaanite cite excavations, claiming that this happened in line with the canaanite conquest by Israel…(my mistatment did not become clear until I reread some of the papers that I wrote on this topic, and realized that claim was proven wrong…yet I hesitated in discussing it until I found this particular paper to give you the complete details)

The most notorious city seized by the israelites was jericho, and upon the excavation of KM Kenyon, it was concluded that the most pertinent destruction of Jericho occurred 1560 BC, well ahead of biblical events…However, archaeologist J.Garstang, had archaeological evidence that pointed to the conquest of jericho sometime between 1400 and 1385 BC, accounting for the forty years of Israelite wandering in the wilderness after the departure from egypt, he and others found archaeological evidence that support for an exodus date sometime between 1440 and 1425 BC….finding a middle date of 1433BC…you will soon see why…

Yes, for centuries scholars have been searching for proof through all the extensive egyptian records of such an exodus and its date…the only records that were found were in the writings of Manetho…Manetho states that
“After the blasts, God’s displeasure broke upon egypt,” a Pharoah named Toumosis negotiated with the Sheperd People(as you know this is what the hebrews were called by others as well as by Exodus)…”the people from the east, to evacuate Egypt and go whither they would, unmolested.” They then left and traveres the wilderness, “and built a city in a country now called Judaea…and gave it the name Jerusalem.”

Did this indeed happen? Or did the exodus occur under the reign of a pharoah named thothmes…thutmose???

Manetho referred to “the king who expelled the pastoral people from egypt” in a section devoted to pharoahs of the eigtheenth dynasty…egyptologists now accept as historical fact the expulsion of the hyskos( the eastern “Sheperd Kings”) in 1567BC by the founder of the eigtheenth dynasty, the pharoah Ahmosis(amosis in Greek)…this new dyansty, which established the New Kingdom in egypt, might well have ben the dynasty of Pharoahs “who knew not joseph” of which the bible speaks (exodus 1:8)

Theophilus, second century bishop of Antioch also referred in his writings to Manetho and stated tat the hebrews were enslaved by the king Tethmosis, for whom they “built strong cities, Peitho and Rameses and On, which is Heliopolis”, then they departed Egypt under the Pharoah whose name was Amasis…

Thus it appears from these ancient sources that the Israelites’ troubles began under a pharoah named thutmose/thuthmes and culminated with tehir departure under a successor named Amasis. What are the historical facts as they have been established by now?

Okay…
After ahmosis had expelled the hyskos, his succesors on the throone of egypt, several of whom did bear the name thutmose as these ancient historians have stated…engaged in military campaigns in greater Cana’an, using the Way of the Sea as their invasion route…

Thutmose I(1525-1512 BC) a professional soldier put egypt ona war footing and launched invasions as far as the euphrates river- he feared Israelite disloyalty, we know this from egyptian inscriptions stating “when a war shall be called, they(israelites) shall join our enemies” and ordered therefore the killing of all new born israelite male babies…supported by bothe exodus -16) and the inscriptions of Thutmose I himself…

By calculation, made from genesis, Moses was birn 1513 BC, the year before Thutmose I was born…

Hatshepsut, was the eldest daughter of thutmose and the legitimate one that held the throne after he died…it was she who found and adopted Moses…her continued treatment of Moses as her adopted son canbe explained by the fact that she married Thutmose II, the succeding Pharoah, and her half brother…yet she could not bear him a son…

Thutmose II died shortly after, his succesor was thutmose III…with illigetimate origins…he was Egypt’s greatest warrior king….he was an ancient napolean as held by some scholars…

He made 17 campaigns against foreign lands to obtain tribute and captives for his major construction works, most were done in cana’an lebanon and as far as the euphrates river…egyptologists and biblical scholars had reached yet another conclusion together…
It was thutmose III that was the enslaver of the Israelites…for his campaigns drove so far northward they reached a city called naharin, the egyptian/kmtic name for the area on the upper euphrates, Aram-Naharim in biblical hebrew, this place is where some kinfolk of the Hebrew Patriarchs still remained who fought and protected their land against egypt’s invasions…and this explained the egyptian slab that was found with inscriptions that stated ““when a war shall be called, they(israelites) shall join our enemies”..

It was indeed Thutmose III from whose death sentence Mosese escaped to the wilderness of the Sinai after he had learned of his hebrew origins and openly sided with his people…

Thutmose III died in 1450 BC and was followed on the throne by Amenophis II- the Amasis named by theophilus qouting Manetho. It was indeed “after a long time, that the king of Egyot died,” Exodus 2:23 that moses dared to retrun to egyot to demand of the succesor Amenophis II to “let my people go”

Amenophis II reigned from 1450 to 1425BC, therefore the egyptologists and biblical scholars yet again came to the same conclusion that the exodus had taken place in 1433BC, exactly when Moses was 80 years old as supoorted by the bible…exodus ….



If you caught all of that, look for my next post on when teh israelites arrived in Egypt

Akwaaba

You definitely need to LIST your sources. Vague references to pertinent archaeological digs, translated Egyptian texts, other primary sources, and specific passages of the Bible isn't very helpful.

Moving on...

In what records does it state that Hatshepsut was the caretaker of Moses? Considering her popularity I'm SHOCKED that I've never heard this before.

Furthermore where does the Dorian invasion of KMT fit into all of this. You said KMT was under Greek rule when the Exodus occurred. According to my understanding the New Kingdom WAS NOT UNDER GREEK RULE. Are you saying that the royal family and Thutmose III were all Greek? Evidence please.

Also it is interesting that you did not mention that according to Egyptologists AND Manetho, the Hyksos RULED Egypt and weren't just "slaves." They assumed power during the Second Intermediate period when the centralized government of KMT had collapsed which is thought to be due to low agricultural productivity on which centralized power was based. According to Manetho the Hyksos took over through a "bloodless coup" and were later expelled.

And a sidenote: If you want to use Manetho as a reliable source what about his recordings of a line of KMTic rulers going back beyond 4000 BCE ? In fact if I'm not mistaken his traces the history of KMT back at least 26,000 years, thus completing an Egyptian Great Year or time through which the sun passes through all of the 12 zodiacal constellations.

Some sources:
_Ancient REcords of Egypt_ James Henry Breasted

_Ancient African Civilizations_ Runoko Rashidi

_Egypt_ ? Ivan Van Sertima (editor)

_Women LEaders in African History_ David Sweetman

_Echoes from the Old Darkland_ Charles Finch

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

(from The New Jerusalem Bible, p.81; pub. by Doubleday, 1990)


>Thutmose I(1525-1512 BC) a professional soldier
>put egypt ona war footing
>and launched invasions as far
>as the euphrates river- he
>feared Israelite disloyalty, we know
>this from egyptian inscriptions stating
>“when a war shall be
>called, they(israelites) shall join our
>enemies” and ordered therefore the
>killing of all new born
>israelite male babies…supported by bothe
>exodus 1: 9-16) and the inscriptions
>of Thutmose I himself…

Exodus 1:11 footnote: "Egypt does not seem to have had a regular system of forced labour, though the manpower for major undertakings was provided in part by prisoners of war and by serfs attached to the royal domains, see for Israel, 2 Samuel 12:31. The Israelites regarded being reduced to theese inferior categories as an intolerable from of oppression. It is not surprising that they wanted to return to their free way of life in the desert; nor that the Egyptians took the suggestion as a form of slave revolt."

Exodus 1:12 footnote: "Residence in the Delta of Pharaoh Rameses II; to be identified either with Tanis or with Qantir. The reference indicates Ramses II (1290-1224) as the oppressive Pharaoh and gives an approximate date for the Exodus." (see my other post titled "for example" for reasons why it may be difficult to pinpoint when the Hebrews left Egypt)

Exodus 1:14 footnote: "The story of oppression is continued at 5:6-23. In the following verses, the measures taken for the destruction of the male children do not tally with the requirements of forced labor, but prepare the ground for the story of the birth of Moses."


as poetx said in another post, why would the Egyptians kill all those newborns if they needed so many slaves? It seems to boil down to a matter of perspective...the Hebrews my have seen their status in Egypt as negative and wrote their story accordingly.

_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>(from The New Jerusalem Bible, p.81;
>pub. by Doubleday, 1990)

In regards to this, let's be sure we know that these "new bibles" are interpreting stories correctly some scholars are interpreting the old testament particularly off of diluted english versions or from bookslike the talmud and pentateuch which have been proven to be tampered with...

The torah however cannot be tampered with or it changes how the book is read...see for reference meru.org...

the torah much like the Qur'an reads in a certain way...teh Qur'an reads like a song, something that flows into itself, much like the torah, almost exactly for the slight difference that in the torah the first five books of teh tanach, the first hebrew letter of Genesis leads/means into the first word, means the first sentence means the first paragraph, means the first chapter means the first book, means the Torah...
the letters and words when written side by side is in actuality one word....from genesis to deutoronomy...it reads a specific way, it has a beat...if anyone adds or takes away...it skips or loses a beat...

with that said, unless you have a hebrew english book, I wouldn't put too much faith in it...

>
>>Thutmose I(1525-1512 BC) a professional soldier
>>put egypt ona war footing
>>and launched invasions as far
>>as the euphrates river- he
>>feared Israelite disloyalty, we know
>>this from egyptian inscriptions stating
>>“when a war shall be
>>called, they(israelites) shall join our
>>enemies” and ordered therefore the
>>killing of all new born
>>israelite male babies…supported by bothe
>>exodus 1: 9-16) and the inscriptions
>>of Thutmose I himself…
>
>Exodus 1:11 footnote: "Egypt does not
>seem to have had a
>regular system of forced labour,
>though the manpower for major
>undertakings was provided in part
>by prisoners of war and
>by serfs attached to the
>royal domains, see for Israel,
>2 Samuel 12:31. The Israelites
>regarded being reduced to theese
>inferior categories as an intolerable
>from of oppression.

It is simply more than just being reduced to categories, you and your ancestors yourself were reduced to thos categories and now not even 600 years later some of us still consider that intolerable...even so...the hatred of the "Sheperd People" was more than that as stated through exodus as well...it was a hatred of teh people, the people were considered inferior, and dirty...they were considered low class human beings...

do you honestly think that such a prejudice, was simply reduced to categories, look at world life...do you see what this prejudice does to our world now...Do you think that people have changed since then? Is it for the worse or for the better?

It
>is not surprising that they
>wanted to return to their
>free way of life in
>the desert; nor that the
>Egyptians took the suggestion as
>a form of slave revolt."

You say it here yourself, it is not surprising that the israelites wnated to return to their "free" way of life- tehy were not free...

nor as well, it is not surprising that the Egyptians took it as a form of slave revolt...

(by the way, when I say you sometimes I am addressing the poster and other times I am addressing all readers)

>
>Exodus 1:12 footnote: "Residence in the
>Delta of Pharaoh Rameses II;
>to be identified either with
>Tanis or with Qantir.
>The reference indicates Ramses II
>(1290-1224) as the oppressive Pharaoh
>and gives an approximate date
>for the Exodus."

According to scholars and egyptologists, archaeologists and historians the hebrews were not even in egypt at that time, as well, David was already king of Israel...so that it is way after the timeof teh exodus...

Artifacts, slabs with inscriptions and accounts by ancient historians(which were infact recorders of their present time) all lead scholars and the like to the year 1433bc...it may be hard for this millenium scholars who have diluted texts and maybe have never left their country to pinpoint the date, yet, we have scholars from all over the world, including germany, holland, greece, egypt, israel, america and france who have done this study...

This is why I say it is important to break out of our shell of amerixcan this and afrikan that...the view one should have is not from that perspective, it should be a world view...from your own eyes not from the eyes of someone elses point of view...teh only way to get unbiased inof is to either research opposing sides pov's or to research with teh rest of the world, with so many hands in the pot from different countries, the search is not to prove personal ties to antiquity, but simply to find the truth...

>Exodus 1:14 footnote: "The story of
>oppression is continued at 5:6-23.
> In the following verses,
>the measures taken for the
>destruction of the male children
>do not tally with the
>requirements of forced labor,

yes this may have been true at that time, but I urge you to read what I have written again...and see that teh hebrews were not put into forced labor during the time that Moses was born which was 1513 BC, they were not put into that forced labor until Moses was between teh ages of 35 and 45 during the times of thutmose III.....thutmose the I was the one who according to his own inscriptions declared to kill all the first borns...


>as poetx said in another post,
>why would the Egyptians kill
>all those newborns if they
>needed so many slaves?

I explained why this happened in my previous post...it would do some good to read before replying...

these inscriptions were in thutmose's own words..with his royal seals

It
>seems to boil down to
>a matter of perspective...the Hebrews
>my have seen their status
>in Egypt as negative and
>wrote their story accordingly.

So if blacks in America see themselves in an oppressed situation does it make it true or not?

To you its true because you are alive in this time, yet to the future who knew not of us, knew not of our time...with all this info out there, they probably would be saying the same things about us...

Yet, when it comes to history a time when we were not alive we question it because we think that Israelites are not our people, we think that israelites are not black people, we think that black people would not enslave other black people...why is that?

As Solarus and others I believe have stated in other posts....it was easy for Moses to pass as an egyptian to other people, so they must have been the same ethnicity...

More importantly the egyptians and the israelites were more than the same ethnicity, they were brothers and sisters in essence, the Israelites coming from the seed of Shem and the Egyptians from the seed of Mizraim...

It's not about black and white and it is true it is not about what white american men say our history was or the history of egypt or israel say...nor is it embedded in what afrocentric scholars say either for both have an ulterior motive and we fool ourselves if we don't believe that they do...

I'll post my references, I have over twelve pages....do you all think that you will really let it help you to see the events of history clearer?

>In regards to this, let's be
>sure we know that these
>"new bibles" are interpreting stories
>correctly some scholars are interpreting
>the old testament particularly off
>of diluted english versions or
>from bookslike the talmud and
>pentateuch which have been proven
>to be tampered with...

This bible has been DIRECTLY translated from the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. That's why I bought it. It tells you where the Greek added & the Hebrew omitted and vice versa. It also does not translate terms like "El Shaddai" into "Almighty God" & states where things have been glossed or are unclear.

No, the language is not in the tradition of King James, but it is far from one of the "new" versions or simplified "plain language" versions you're talking about. I'm not going to post the entire introduction, but there are details there about how this bible is translated & what was taken into account.



>the torah much like the Qur'an
>reads in a certain way...teh
>Qur'an reads like a song,
>something that flows into itself,
>much like the torah,
...
>it reads a specific way,
>it has a beat...if anyone
>adds or takes away...it skips
>or loses a beat...
>
>with that said, unless you have
>a hebrew english book, I
>wouldn't put too much faith
>in it...

Granted. But a lot of that "flow", may be poetic license as well. Makes it sound good, but isn't necessarily a reliable historical document. Error is inherent in anything human. But when you compare the bible & other religious texts to specific histories of lands & peoples, it doesn't always pan out. That doesn't have anything to do w/ the religion itself. It's not an attack on Hebrew or something...the Bible is a beautifully written book. Still, history is history.


>>>Thutmose I(1525-1512 BC) a professional soldier
>>>put egypt ona war footing
>>>and launched invasions as far
>>>as the euphrates river- he
>>>feared Israelite disloyalty, we know
>>>this from egyptian inscriptions stating
>>>“when a war shall be
>>>called, they(israelites) shall join our
>>>enemies” and ordered therefore the
>>>killing of all new born
>>>israelite male babies…supported by bothe
>>>exodus 1: 9-16) and the inscriptions
>>>of Thutmose I himself…

The note mentions Rameses II (1290-1224) & claims he is the nameless Pharaoh. So far I have seen no mention of Thutmose or his rule at the time all this may have been going on. Could there be two separate traditions, as the other note said? One around Rameses' time and the other at Thutmose's, as you stated?


>It is simply more than just
>being reduced to categories, you
>and your ancestors yourself were
>reduced to thos categories and
>now not even 600 years
>later some of us still
>consider that intolerable...even so...the hatred
>of the "Sheperd People" was
>more than that as stated
>through exodus as well...it was
>a hatred of teh people,
>the people were considered inferior,
>and dirty...they were considered low
>class human beings...

it's just a statement to give some clarity to the cultural attitudes of the time. nothing personal. and, as others have said, the term "shepherd people" used in the Bible most likely refers to the Hyksos who ruled Egypt for a time.

apparently you agree with what the note says. so would you also agree that the writing of the scriptures may have been colored by this feeling and, as such, took some historical license when dealing w/ their "oppression" in Egypt? Could that be why there are no historical records, as such, of this mass enslavement?


>You say it here yourself, it
>is not surprising that the
>israelites wnated to return to
>their "free" way of life-
>tehy were not free...

I didn't say it. The footnote said it. I am not unequivically agreeing/disagreeing w/ the author in any of these situations. Just typing what's already there.

And, again, it was the Hebrew PERCEPTION that they were not "free". According to the Egyptians, they may have been, hence, the lack of records...


>According to scholars and egyptologists, archaeologists
>and historians the hebrews were
>not even in egypt at
>that time, as well, David
>was already king of Israel...so
>that it is way after
>the timeof teh exodus...
>
>Artifacts, slabs with inscriptions and accounts
>by ancient historians(which were infact
>recorders of their present time)
>all lead scholars and the
>like to the year 1433bc...it
>may be hard for this
>millenium scholars who have diluted
>texts and maybe have never
>left their country to pinpoint
>the date, yet, we have
>scholars from all over the
>world, including germany, holland, greece,
>egypt, israel, america and france
>who have done this study...

Again, this particular Bible isn't going off of "millenium" scholars, but a direct translation.

But, as I said, I have a lot more research/reading to do. I'm not really arguing any of these points, just offering a differing point of view.


>yes this may have been true
>at that time, but I
>urge you to read what
>I have written again...and see
>that teh hebrews were not
>put into forced labor during
>the time that Moses was
>born which was 1513 BC,
>they were not put into
>that forced labor until Moses
>was between teh ages of
>35 and 45 during the
>times of thutmose III.....thutmose the
>I was the one who
>according to his own inscriptions
>declared to kill all the
>first borns...

again, I didn't write these notes. But it seems that if Thutmose had something to do w/ this, his name would be somewhere & so far it isn't.


>these inscriptions were in thutmose's own
>words..with his royal seals

Have any pictures? Sources that might have pictures of this inscription? Or do you know which monument it was on? What document?

>
>It
>>seems to boil down to
>>a matter of perspective...the Hebrews
>>my have seen their status
>>in Egypt as negative and
>>wrote their story accordingly.
>
>So if blacks in America see
>themselves in an oppressed situation
>does it make it true
>or not?

You're getting opinionated again....that's not the issue.

And again, everyone is asking, "where are the Egyptian records"??? Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt w/ Thutmose w/ the killing of the first borns, that STILL doesn't explain why there are NO records of this mass enslavement.

We KNOW thousands of Africans were slaves. We have slave ship records and depictions, bills of sale. Wills. Advertisements for runaways. We have pamphlets like "How to Make a Slave" and the writings of Thomas Jefferson and others calling Blacks less than human, inferior, etc.



>
>To you its true because you
>are alive in this time,
>yet to the future who
>knew not of us, knew
>not of our time...with all
>this info out there, they
>probably would be saying the
>same things about us...

Records speak for themselves.

Where there are no records, there is only speculation...


>we think that
>black people would not enslave
>other black people...why is that?

Oh great, now you're going there.

No one has said no Egyptian didn't have slaves. No one said Africans didn't enslave/sell their own.

We're asking for PROOF the Hebrews endured this neverending battle w/ the Egyptians.

No one is bringing Afrocentrism into this either. People have been comparing what we know of history to the biblical retelling of that history.


>It's not about black and white
>and it is true it
>is not about what white
>american men say our history
>was or the history of
>egypt or israel say...

uh...u made it about that, not me. this is WAY off topic


>I'll post my references, I have
>over twelve pages....do you all
>think that you will really
>let it help you to
>see the events of history
>clearer?

Again, I didn't write any of those notes. I stated ONE inference I made from them. I just wanted to see where your information stood w/ that. The rest is all you...

And Solarus has been asking for sources from jump...

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>This bible has been DIRECTLY translated
>from the original Greek, Hebrew
>and Aramaic. That's why I
>bought it. It tells you
>where the Greek added &
>the Hebrew omitted and vice
>versa. It also does not
>translate terms like "El Shaddai"
>into "Almighty God" & states
>where things have been glossed
>or are unclear.


Okay, but what your book says are still mistranslations and in one instance blaspheme...


>
>Granted. But a lot of that
>"flow", may be poetic license
>as well.

yes but poetic or not, the simple fact is if you tamper with it, people will know...


Makes it sound
>good, but isn't necessarily a
>reliable historical document. Error is
>inherent in anything human.


yes I agree here, like I said the pointis not thatits flow makes it historical but that its flow disallows anyone to tamper with it...

But
>when you compare the bible
>& other religious texts to
>specific histories of lands &
>peoples, it doesn't always pan
>out.

this is incorrect, I have already proven that this is not entirely true...please read...

>>>>Thutmose I(1525-1512 BC) a professional soldier
>>>>put egypt ona war footing
>>>>and launched invasions as far
>>>>as the euphrates river- he
>>>>feared Israelite disloyalty, we know
>>>>this from egyptian inscriptions stating
>>>>“when a war shall be
>>>>called, they(israelites) shall join our
>>>>enemies” and ordered therefore the
>>>>killing of all new born
>>>>israelite male babies…supported by bothe
>>>>exodus 1: 9-16) and the inscriptions
>>>>of Thutmose I himself…
>
>The note mentions Rameses II (1290-1224)
>& claims he is the
>nameless Pharaoh. So far I
>have seen no mention of
>Thutmose or his rule at
>the time all this may
>have been going on. Could
>there be two separate traditions,
>as the other note said?
>One around Rameses' time and
>the other at Thutmose's, as
>you stated?


Yes it's possible, but the story in exodus is speakin specifically of the one during teh reaignof thutmose I II and III, thut I's daughter Hatshepsut, and Amenophis II...

As you can see this was an era of time, not merely the reignof one pharoah but the reignof several different pharoahs

>it's just a statement to give
>some clarity to the cultural
>attitudes of the time. nothing
>personal. and, as others have
>said, the term "shepherd people"
>used in the Bible most
>likely refers to the Hyksos
>who ruled Egypt for a
>time.


Actually, as have been proven, the term sheperd people refers to the Hebrews, teh hebrews carted in their sheep and flocks, teh hebrews were sheperds, they tended flock there is evidence of this throughout exodus and genesis as well, if has already been stated that these same Hyskos were aided by hebrews...please read...

>apparently you agree with what the
>note says. so would you
>also agree that the writing
>of the scriptures may have
>been colored by this feeling
>and, as such, took some
>historical license when dealing w/
>their "oppression" in Egypt? Could
>that be why there are
>no historical records, as such,
>of this mass enslavement?
>

Actually as I have proven in my previous posts there are...please read



>And, again, it was the Hebrew
>PERCEPTION that they were not
>"free". According to the
>Egyptians, they may have been,
>hence, the lack of records...

Yes and it is our interpretation here that we are free. AS well, there are records and slabs found that state otherwise...




>Again, this particular Bible isn't going
>off of "millenium" scholars, but
>a direct translation.


No the trnaslation may not be off of millenium scholars yet teh footnotes are of millenium scholars, you are telling me about their interpretaions and thei interpretations are of a modernized ignorant view...

>But, as I said, I have
>a lot more research/reading to
>do. I'm not really arguing
>any of these points, just
>offering a differing point of
>view.


Okay, I have a list of references which after I am done addressing you and solarus I will post, of records taht you can read, most of them include pictures of ancient maps, and slabs as well as one inparticular includes a reference to teh sumerian dictionary that was founded with its translations and such...


>again, I didn't write these notes.
>But it seems that if
>Thutmose had something to do
>w/ this, his name would
>be somewhere & so far
>it isn't.

None of the names of kings were mentioned unless they spoke of battles...that is something that only a person who understands hebrew history and culture would know...check the tanach you will see...

>
>Have any pictures? Sources that might
>have pictures of this inscription?
>Or do you know which
>monument it was on? What
>document?

yes I have a list of references that you can check and books you can look at or buy...


>You're getting opinionated again....that's not the
>issue.

yes it is the issue, first you give me a statement based on someone's opinion not on their research and teh statement is even of someone else's opinion, so I give you an answer based on opinion moreso common sense...

think...if a people are being enslaved by people who are supposed to be benevolent, do you think that these people would rush to discus it that way...as such I even give you historical proof of human behavior rooted here in teh egypt of the west, yet you call my observation an opinion...

Wake up and see for yourself, the patterns of people not white or black, but people on a whole...and then ask yourself what is more likely true, and tehn after you do that, check my list of references by books, read ...

teh cheapest of all my books is Zecharia Sitchin...why do you all still refuse to do the neccesary research...it's like you are intent on holding an opinion which has been proven by world scholars to be wrong...not simply by their opinion but by their first hand findings of archaeological evidence....


>And again, everyone is asking, "where
>are the Egyptian records"??? Even
>if I give you the
>benefit of the doubt w/
>Thutmose w/ the killing of
>the first borns, that STILL
>doesn't explain why there are
>NO records of this mass
>enslavement.


>We KNOW thousands of Africans were
>slaves. We have slave ship
>records and depictions, bills of
>sale. Wills. Advertisements for runaways.
>We have pamphlets like "How
>to Make a Slave" and
>the writings of Thomas Jefferson
>and others calling Blacks less
>than human, inferior, etc.
>

Yes but this is of the very recent history, think, we are speaking of over 5000 years ago, do you really think that you can find a record for every event of the past that took place over 5000 years ago...and besides that...there is proof...please read...

>
>Records speak for themselves.
>
>Where there are no records, there
>is only speculation...

Yes they do, please see my list of references on where you can find tehse records...

Yimhotep

This is the 1st time i'm hearing about this guy,
and i keep seeing his name linked to UFO sites but anyway a little info from :
http://www.mars-earth.com/sitchintext.htm

"The Sumerian cuneiform deciphering skills of Zecharia Sitchin, a linguist in command of many ancient languages who has set the scientific world on its ear with his astounding interpretations of ancient writings. In 1976, Sitchin's first book, The Twelfth Planet, began an odyssey that has literally transformed the field of ancient history; in 1993 came the sixth book in his Earth Chronicle series, When Time Began. Among other mind boggling assertions, this book links the complex calendar of Stonehenge and the puzzling ruins of Tiahuanacu in Peru to the ancient culture of the Sumerians, and by extension, to the Nibiruans, who are also called the Anunnaki. These are the folks Sitchin insists not only created the Sumerian culture, but who also genetically created human beings as we know them. And yes, they live on this mysterious 12th planet, Nibiru. "


These Anunnaki could they be the ppl referred to as the "vile Anu" by the Ancient Egyptians? those ppl who were constantly invading Egypt?

"...there are some very significant findings on the existence of this other race of people. Perhaps the most compelling is the "face on Mars," the structure in the area called Cydonia on the Red Planet. What is it? If the relationship of the face on Mars is analysed for its distance to other pyramidal structures also discovered on Mars, the geometric relationship is found to be identical to the distances of the Egyptian Sphinx and the pyramids in the surrounding areas of Egypt. Sitchin concluded the placement of these pyramids indicates that they served as landing markers for the Nibiruans after they entered the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. Sitchin also has asserted that the early pyramids were not designed by the Egyptians. NBC-TV aired a program on Nov.10, 1993 entitled "The Mystery of the Sphinx", indicating that the Sphinx is 2,000 years older than previously thought. This corroborates Sitchin's findings that someone other than the Egyptians designed the pyramids. "


First off Mr Zecharia isn't the only one to say put back the age of the Sphinx, Dr. Charles Finch has said the same), y does it not naturally follow that the age of the ppl who were their needs to be chaged as well? i.e. if the Sphinx was built 2k yrs earlier, y does it not follow that _PPL_ built the Sphinx 2k yrs earlier? y is the interpretation that the Sphinx was built 2k yrs earlier so ETs / ppl other than the ppl who were there must have done it?

also YAH, y don't u think _he_ has an ulterior motive like u always say the ppl we recommend u read might? can there be some give and take? can u read 2 books by C.A. Diop and we read the info on Sichtin?

Shemhotep
************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

why do you assume that I haven't read those books...

name me his books, and I'll read on eof his books that I haven't read before, as well I would suggest taht for only 7 bucks purchase the twelfth planet...even though teh war of gods and men is a good one as well...

Yimhotep
name me the books u've read.
Shemhotep
************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

Check my up and coming references..

Yimhotep
_Cain_ is a book authored by C.A. Diop?

Shemhotep

************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

means yes...

I do that sometimes

"We are what we behold and we behold what we are"

The Cultural Unity of Black Africa: The Domains of Matriarchy and of Patriarchy in Classical Antiquity
Civilization or Barbarianism….

Yimhotep

These are the ones that go into KMTic history w/ a little more detail, w/ timelines and the like.

Civilization or Barbarism (New York: Lawrence Hill, 1991).

The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality

especially the second one.

Shemhotep

************
Our limitations are a temporary point
in our growth, as opposed to a finite
and essential quality of our spirit.
-Ra Un Nefer Amen (paraphrased)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

the twelfth Planet
when time began
The wars of gods and men...now you

>Okay, but what your book says
>are still mistranslations and in
>one instance blaspheme...

I'll accept "mistranslation", but "blaspheme" is relative...


>Yes it's possible, but the story
>in exodus is speakin specifically
>of the one during teh
>reaignof thutmose I II and
>III, thut I's daughter Hatshepsut,
>and Amenophis II...
>
>As you can see this was
>an era of time, not
>merely the reignof one pharoah
>but the reignof several different
>pharoahs
>

That's still a loooonnng way off from Ramseses' time. Do you have any reason why these scholars may place it in his time & you're dealing w/ centuries later?

Do you, based on your knowledge, have any reason why there might be 2 separate traditions or why the bible combined those traditions? (if you've already answered that, just direct me to the post #)


>Actually, as have been proven, the
>term sheperd people refers to
>the Hebrews, teh hebrews carted
>in their sheep and flocks,
>teh hebrews were sheperds, they
>tended flock there is evidence
>of this throughout exodus and
>genesis as well, if has
>already been stated that these
>same Hyskos were aided by
>hebrews...please read...

Ok, but WHO is saying this? All the references I've seen so far are mentioning the Hyksos, NOT the Hebrews or a Hebrew-Hyksos affiliation.


>No the trnaslation may not be
>off of millenium scholars yet
>teh footnotes are of millenium
>scholars, you are telling me
>about their interpretaions and thei
>interpretations are of a modernized
>ignorant view...

what's "modernized" about taking the information in the text and comparing it to other ancient sources & the information we have now to get a clearer understanding of what these folks & others went thru and what was going on in the world at the time the Bible was written?

sounds like good scholarship to me, not "ignorance"...

like I said, I'm not going to type the entire introduction to this particular Bible here (although there's a quote I'll get to in a sec.), but it explains the scholarship behind those notes.


>None of the names of kings
>were mentioned unless they spoke
>of battles...that is something that
>only a person who understands
>hebrew history and culture would
>know...check the tanach you will
>see...

I meant in the attempt to place the Bible within a historic timeline Thutmose isn't mentioned.

This is the kind of statement I was referring to when I said it seems like you're going from the bible/tanach ~~~> history whereas my perspective is history ~~~> the bible.


>yes it is the issue, first
>you give me a statement
>based on someone's opinion not
>on their research

these footnotes are not coming out of opinion. Biblical scholars and several translators came together to compile the information in this book. there are no theological interpretations or the value judgements I've seen in other versions of the Bible. These are historic/linguistic comparisons made from what information we have available.

now, of course scholars disagree on certain points. they always have. but I would be careful just reducing these points to "opinion".


>Wake up and see for yourself,
>the patterns of people not
>white or black, but people
>on a whole...and then ask
>yourself what is more likely
>true, and tehn after you
>do that, check my list
>of references by books, read

off topic again...

and i'm really waiting on these references...


>teh cheapest of all my books
>is Zecharia Sitchin...why do you
>all still refuse to do
>the neccesary research...it's like you
>are intent on holding an
>opinion

do I need a disclaimer too?

I HAVE NOT STATED MY OPINION.

I have only re-written what was already in front of me. Did I follow up with my own interpretation of what was there? No. I gave you the words of the source, from the source. Something you have yet to do. But I did not comment on/decipher/endorse/interpret ANY of it.

And like I said, what I've read so far on that Sitchin cat is questionable, at best. Not to say he's to be totally and completely discredited, but I'm not willing to uphold his theories either.


>Yes but this is of the
>very recent history, think, we
>are speaking of over 5000
>years ago, do you really
>think that you can find
>a record for every event
>of the past that took
>place over 5000 years ago...

Of course not. Why are you going to such extremes.

Again, as others have said, Egypt is one of the best documented ancient societies we know of. And yes, some of those records were lost, but still...

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>>Okay, but what your book says
>>are still mistranslations and in
>>one instance blaspheme...
>
>I'll accept "mistranslation", but "blaspheme" is
>relative...



no if teh book doesn't stae that yet one book says it does taht is a lie...therefore blaspheme



>
>That's still a loooonnng way off
>from Ramseses' time. Do you
>have any reason why these
>scholars may place it in
>his time & you're dealing
>w/ centuries later?

I'm not dealing with centuries later,if we're talking BC and I am then you will see that it was centuries earlier...

>Do you, based on your knowledge,
>have any reason why there
>might be 2 separate traditions
>or why the bible combined
>those traditions? (if you've already
>answered that, just direct me
>to the post #)
>

Bsed on what I have read there was not two different exodus'...there was only one...exodus refers to the movement of Israel from teh holds of Egypt....as well if there was a previous or later moment that is not called an exodus, that would be calledsomething...exodus is specific to the Israelite movement out of egypt to the Promised land eretz yisrael...any thing else by that definition is not an exodus...

If one happened during teh time of ramses 1200 bc circa and one happend 1433 BC then it would appear that the exodus that the scholars are speaking of is copying from teh first exodus, that of the Israelite people out of egypt into eretz yisrael...

I trust that will give you a clearer understanding...
>
>Ok, but WHO is saying this?
>All the references I've seen
>so far are mentioning the
>Hyksos, NOT the Hebrews or
>a Hebrew-Hyksos affiliation.
>

Please see my list of studies and references to find out who

>what's "modernized" about taking the information
>in the text and comparing
>it to other ancient sources
>& the information we have
>now to get a clearer
>understanding of what these folks
>& others went thru and
>what was going on in
>the world at the time
>the Bible was written?
>
>sounds like good scholarship to me,
>not "ignorance"...
>
>like I said, I'm not going
>to type the entire introduction
>to this particular Bible here
>(although there's a quote I'll
>get to in a sec.),
>but it explains the scholarship
>behind those notes.
>

It doesn't seem to me based on what you have typed that that is the case, for if they did then they would be in aggreeance with the list of names on my references...in one case as you have shown me they even have a book that tells them that in hebrew they referred to the red see as Yam Suph...when that is just not accurate about the original hebrew texts...


>I meant in the attempt to
>place the Bible within a
>historic timeline Thutmose isn't mentioned.

in your books perhaps, what I am saying is that based on teh books that I have read, he is...

>
>This is the kind of statement I was referring to when I said it seems like you're going from the bible/tanach ~~~> history whereas my perspective is history ~~~> the bible.

No i'm not merely going from the bible, that is not even wher I began my research...please see my list of references...

Continuing the calculations backwards egyptologists sought to establish the date when the Israelites arrived on egypt…the tanach asserts that a stay of 400 years in acord withte Lord’s statement to Abraham…(genesis 15:13-14); also states te book of the new testament Acts 7:6…the book of exodus however says that Israelites dwelt in egypt for 430 years(exodus 12:40-41)…but we know that this too was accounted for because like exodus also states…Joseph and his family the josephites dwelled in egypt before the the arrival of his brothers and their, what was added more to this was the fact that Joseph was made chief of Egypt at thirtyyears old…this leaves intact the 400 years and added to 1433 places the even at 1833 BC…

The next clue is found in Genesis 47:8-9 “And Joseph brought his father and stood hime before the pharoah and the pharoah saidunto Jacob: ‘How old art thou? And jacob answers: My years are one hundred and thirty…placing Jacon’s birth in 1963BC….

Now Isaac was sixty years old when Jacob was born unto him (genesis 6 : 26); and Isaac was born unto his father Abraham when Abraham was 100 years old…Genesis 21 : 5…Abraham who lived to be 175 was 160 years old when his grandon Jacob was born….this places the birth of Abrham in 2123 BC….

The century of Abraham the hundred years from his birth to the birth of his son and successor Isaac-was thus the century that witnessed the rise and fall of the third dynasty of Ur….egyptologists and biblical scholars working together the biblical chronology puts Abraham right un the middle of importanat events along this timeline…not as an observer but as an active participant…

References

Studies, articles and reports in various issues of the following periodicals and scholarly series:

Abhandlungn der Deutschen(preusscien) Akademie der Wissenscaften zu berlin
Abhandlungn der Deutschen Orient-Gesselschaft(berlin)
Abhandlungn der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil-hist. Klasse(heidelberg)
Abhandlungen fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes(leizpeg)
Acta Orientalia(oslo)
Acta Societatis Scientarium Fennica (helsinki)
Aegyplogische Forschungen (Hamburg-New york)
Der Alte rient (leipzig)
Alter Orient und Altes Testament(kevaler/Neukirchen-Vluyn)
Altorientalische Bibliothek (leipzig)
Altorientalische Furschungen (leipzig)
Altorientalische texte and Untersuchungen (leiden)
Altorientalische texte zum Alten testament (berlin and leipzig)
American Journal of Archaeology (concorde, Mass.)
American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature (Chicago)
American Oriental Series(New Haven)
American Philosiphical Society, Memoirs and transactions(philadelphia)
Analecta Biblica(rome)
Analecta Orientalia(ome)
Anatolica(Istanbul)
Anatolian Studies(london)
Annual of the American Schools of Oriental research( New Haven)
Annual of the Palestine Exploration fund( london)
The Antiquaries Journal (london)
Antiquites Orientales(Paris)
Antiquity (Gloucester)
Archiv Fur Keilschriftforschung (berlin)
Archiv fur Orientforschung (berlin)
Archiv Orientalni(prague)
The assyrian dictionary(chicago)
Ausbagen der Deutschen Orient-Geselscahft in Sssur(berlin)

Babyloniaca(paris)
Babylonian Expedetion of the University of PA: Cuneiform texts- philadelphia
Babylonian Inscription in the Collection of JB nNies(new Haven)
Babylonian records in the library of J. Pierpont Morgan( new Haven)
Beitrage zur Assyriolgie und semetischen Sprachwissencraft(leipzig)
Berliner Beitrage zure Vor- und Fruhgeschiste(berlin)
Biblica et Orientalia ( rome)
The Biblical archaeologist ( new haven)
Biblical Archaeology review
Bibliotheca Mesopotamia
Biblitheca Orientalis
Bibliotheque de l’cole des Hautes Etudes
Boghazkoi-Studien
Die Boghazkoi texte im Umschrift
British schools of archeaology in Egypt: Egyptian Research Account publications
Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research
Bulletin of the Isarel Exploration Society

Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series: Studies
The Cambridge Ancient History
Chicago University Oriental Institute, Publication
Colombia University Oriental Studies
Cuneiform texts from Babylonian tablets in the British Museum
Cuneiform texts from nimrud

Decouvers en Chaldee
Deutsche Orient-Gesellscahft, Mitteilungen; sensdschriften
Deutsches Morgenlandische Gessellscaft, Abhandlungen

Egypt exploration fund
Eretz yisrael: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies
Ex Oreinte Lux
Expedition: the bulletin of the university Museum

Forschungen und Fortshritte
France: Delgation en perse, Memours

Handbuch der Achalogie
Handbuch der Orientalistik
Harvard Semitic Sreies
Hebrew Union College Annual
Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient
Hittite texts in Cuneiform Character from Tablets in the British Museum

Invenaries des tablettes de tello
Iran
Iranica Antiqua
Irag
Institut Francais d’Archelogie Orientale: Biblithequ d’etude Memoires
Israel Exploration Journal
Isarel Oriental Studies

Jena niversity: texte and Materielen, Frau Prof. Hilprecht Sammlung
Jewish Palestine Exploration Society, Bulletin
Journal of The American Oriental Society
Journal of the Ancient Near EasternSociety of Columbia University
Journal Asiatique
Journal of Biblical Literature and exegesis
Journal of Cuneiform Studies-----must read
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
Journal of Jewsih studies
Journal of Near Eastern Studies
Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
Journal of Sacred Literature and Biblical Record
Journal of Semitic Studies
Journal of the Society of Oriental research
Journal of the Transaction of the Victoria Institute

Kadmos
Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek
Keilschriftetexte aus Assur historischen inhalts
Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiosen Inhalts
Keilschrifttexte aus assur verschiedenen Inhalts
Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazkoi
Konigliche Museen zu Berlin: Mitteilungen aus den Orientalischen Sammlungen
Konigliche Akademie der Wissenchaften zu Berlin: Abhandlungen

Leipziger Semitischen Studien

Memoires de la Delagation Archologique en Iran
Mesopotamia------must read
Mitteilungen der Altorientalishcen Gesselschaft
Mieilungen des Instituts fur Orientforschung
Mitteilungen der corderasaitisch-aegyptischen Gesellschaft
The Museum Journal
Museums, Mongrams, the University Museum

Old Testament and Semitic Studies
Oriens
Oriens Antiqus
Oriental Institute Publications
Orientalia
Orientalische Literaturseitung
Oxford Editions of Cuneiform texts------must read

Palestine exploration Quarterly- lex this will help you sort out the philstia thing
Proceedijngs of the American Philosophical Society
Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology
Publications of the University of PA, series in Philosophy

Qadmoniot
The Quarterly of the Departmet of Antiquities in Palestine

Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vodreasitishen Archaologie
Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte
Recuil de travaux relatifs a la philosophie et a l’archeologie
Recontres Assryiologique Internationales
Revue Archeologique
Revue d’Assyriologie et e’archeologie orientale
Revue biblique
Revue hittite et asiatique
Revue de l’histoire des religions: Annales du Musee Guimet

Sachsiche Akademie der Wissenschaften: Berichte uber die Verhandlugen
Sachsonische Gesselscahft der Wissenscahft, philo-hist Klasse
Studia Orientalia
Studia Pohl
Studia Semitici
Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations
Sumer- good one too
Syria

Tel Aviv
Texte und Materailen der FrauProf. Hilprecht Collection
Textes cuneiformes
Texts from Cuneiform Sources
Transaction of eth Society of Biblical Archaeology

Universitas catolica Lovaniensis: Dissertation- good ones
University Museum Bulletin
University Museum, Publications of the Babylonian Section
Untersuchungen zur Assyriologie und Vorderasitischen Arcaologie
Ur excavations- good read
Ur Excavation Texts – good ones too – both -london
Ugarit Forschungen
Ugaritica

Vetus Testamentum
Vorderasiatisch-Aegyptischen Gesselschaft, Mitteilungen
Vorderasiatische Bibliothek
Vorlaufer Bericht uber die Ausgrabungen un Uruk-Warka

Die Welt des Orients
Wissenscghaftliche Veroffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-gesselSchaft

Yale Near Eastern Researches
Yale Oriental Series, babylonian texts
Yerusalayim

Zeitschrift fur die altestamentliche Wissenschaft
Zietischrift fur Assyriologie
Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gessellschaft
Zeitschrift fur Keilschriftforschung

ii. Individual Works and studies

Alster, B., Dummuxi’s dream
Amiet, P., Elam and La Gylptique Mesopotamienne Archaique
Andrae, W. Das, Goteshaus und die Urformen des Bauens im Alten Orient

Barondes, R., the Garden of the Gods
Barton, G, the Royal Inscriptions of Sumer andAkkad- these are both excellent sources
Baudissin, W. W. von, Adonis and Eshmun
Bauer, J., Altsmerishce Wirtschaftetexte aus Lagasch
Behrens, H, Enlil and Ninli---this one is excellent
Berossus, gragments of Chaldean history------informative
Breasted, JH., Ancient records of Egypt
Brinkman, JA- a political History of Post-Kassite Babylon---informative
Brunton, PA- A search in Secret Egypt
Bucellatu, G., - the Amorites of the Ur III Period
Budge, EAW the Gods of the Egyptians, A history of Egyptm, Osiris and the Egyptian Resurrection and Annals of the Kings of Assyria

Cameron, GG, An early history of Iran
Castellino, G., two Shulgi Hymns
Chiera E, Sumerian Epics and Myths, Sumerian Lexical texts from the Temple School of Nippur……very informative and you are actuall able to see what KMT took from Sumer, Sumerian Temple Accounts from Telloh, Jokha and Drehem, Sumerian texts of varied Contents
Caly, AT- Miscellaneous Inscriptions in the Yale Babylonian Collection
Cohen, S—emmerkar and the Lord Aratta
Cooper, JS- the return of Ninurta to Nippur
Craig, J- asyrian and Babylonian religious Texts

"We are what we behold and we behold what we are"

Akwaaba

When you are making a scholarly reference, you list from which specific article,book, etc. you get your information from. Listing random JOURNALS or BOOKS does not cut it nor is it helpful. For each of those journals and books you referenced, I can find information in them conflicting with all of the information you presented.

I say this not to be harsh on negative towards you but because I specifically received much of my information from some of these works or articles within those journals. I even referenced one of them (Ancient Egyptian Records, JHBreasted) earlier.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks