Why Killing Is The Biggest Business Of All

[iyah360]

A group of people needs to kill another group of people for their land, resources, whatever. After this is said and done, they come in, then write a history which makes them look more righteous than the group which they killed.

This is the legacy of colonialism.

Is this not the policy of the people who claim authorship of the bible as well?

[Oshun_Auset]

With regards to pre-existing texts that have the same stories, I fail to see how the Bible could be predated when it begins with the dawn of man and woman, Adam and Eve.  Certainly there weren't sub-humans writing these accounts before the first two humans in the garden of Eden.  How, then, can the Bible be considered a plagery when the accounts spoken of were passed down true acts of Jehovah's chosen ones...from Abel to Abraham to Noah to Jacob to the twelve tribes.  There's no gap.  What you are suggesting then, I presume, is that these accounts are myths that never happened and the entire Bible is fabricated.  There's too much corroborating evidence for me to even consider that.

If that seems closed-minded, so be it, it's both my opinion that those events occured and my spiritual beliefs have become molded by them.  I certainly don't deny the fact Mohammed walked the earth, though I'm not a follower of Islam, so I fail to see why many non-Christians attempt to deride the accounts that are written of in the Bible - much as they are reiterated in the Qur'an.

This was a non-answer...good dodge though...
So you think the Bible was written at the dawn of man? You don't agree with the FACT that civilizations existed before the Hebrews? I guess to deny pre-existing text you must CHOOSE to not read any other pre-existing cultures literature...I guess some people like to NOT know. If one's spiritual beliefs can't even stand up to simmple questions...how strong is it? Not answering the question...or answering it with information that is clearly false is disturbing when speaking of spirituality...(especially when so much of the information is given on this site alone).

The reason I asked about sticking to the Helio Biblio is because us Africans authored many of the papyri and spiritual systems it is plagerized from. The system that enslaved and colonized us does not want us to deal with that. Ignoring it is helping the enemy.

Yeshu the historical figure has been intermixed with the mythical Ausar and Heru(as have all other great men of spirit)....The similarities are astounding. How can anyone deny these things?....Should we not want to know the truth? Is God the enemy of knowledge?

Iyah 360 and Rootsie....good points...seems we have an issue dodger in our midst...

[out_of_Zion]

You don't agree with the FACT that civilizations existed before the Hebrews?

You seem to be missing a point here.  There literally can be no pre-existing civilization when the Hebrew line begins with the beginning of man and civilization in the garden of Eden.  I realize you don't like to acknowledge this fact.

The only way to beget your theory is to a) call this a biblical myth in which case you can take that up with El Shaddai JAH himself and tell the Almighty you don't believe his letter to you, or b) say that these "pre-existing" peoples you speak of were ape men and that you believe in evolution.  Sadly enough, though, even the most ardent evolutionists have come to realize that humans came from a single pair originally as they've studied the make up of the sex determinant chromosome, specifically the Y.

Because this fact speaks for itself:

Lineage of the Hebrews from Adam & Eve to Jacob

GOD => Adam, Eve
Cain, Abel, Seth
Seth => Noah,
Shem, Ham, Japeth
Ham => Terach => Abraham, Haran
Haran => Lot => Ammon, Moab
Abraham => Rebecca, Issac, Ishmael
Ishmael => JACOB (and Leah, Rachel, Zilpah, Bilhah, Esau)
JACOB => 12 TRIBES...and the Hebrews

While there may have been civilizations that pre-existed prior to the Hebrews there were no people that pre-existed the first two Hebrews, namely Adam and Eve.  


"But the lawless one's presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying sings and portents and with every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of truth that they might be saved.  So that is why God lets an error of operation go to them, that they may get to believing the lie, in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness."  -2nd Thessalonians 2:9-12

[iyah360]

You would do well to study the mythologies of the ancient African people such as the Mbuti(Pygmies) who have dwelt in the cradle of mankind since antiquity, as many of the stories that are co-opted in the bible began with these people.

The first creation of man in Genesis 1 precedes the story of Adam in Genesis 2 and this differentiation has been used to justify the subhuman status and exploitation of many of the first peoples of the world.

[out_of_Zion]

The first creation of man in Genesis 1 precedes the story of Adam in Genesis 2 and this differentiation has been used to justify the subhuman status and exploitation of many of the first peoples of the world.

Could you explain that to me a little more in depth please? I don't understand exactly what you mean.  Are you saying that white imperialists have used Genesis to call the indigenous tribes of Afrika sub-human?

[iyah360]

There are 2 accounts of the creation of humans in the book of Genesis. In this story is the reflection of the idea that earlier man(created in Genesis 1) was soulless, as Gerald Massey states: " . . . the spirits of wickedness, the inferior Seven, derived their origin from the great mother alone, who produced without fatherhood! It was in the image, then, of the sevenfold Elohim that the seven races were formed(sic. Genesis 1) which we sometimes hear of as the pre-Adamite races of men, because they were earlier than the fatherhood which was individualized only in the second Hebrew creation(sic. Genesis 2). These were the primitive people of the past,--the old, despised, dark races of the world,--who were held to have been created without souls."

Genesis 1
"26   And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27   So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

. . . and then . . . .  

Genesis 2
5   And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6   But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7   And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Notice that in Genesis 2, ADAM, who is the man AS A LIVING SOUL is formed AFTER god moistens the earth "for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth."  

This idea is reflected later by Philo in his philosophical interpretations of the stories in the old testament. Note ESPECIALLY the equating of loose earth with that of the Chus(Cushites/Ethiopians):

"81) Why the eldest son of Ham is Chus. (#Ge 10:6). The sacred historian has here produced a word most completely in accordance with nature, saying that Chus was the elder son of evil, Chus being the dissolved and loose nature of the earth, for the earth, when dense and fertile, and moist, is full of herbs, and hills, and trees, and is well arranged for the production of different fruits; but when dissolved and reduced to dust and dry, it is unfruitful and barren; and besides it is tossed about in the air, when it is raised from the ground by the wind, by its dust making the air all alive. Such as this is the first origin and the first shoots of evil being destitute of the generation of good pursuits, and the cause of barrenness to the soul and to all its parts."

[Oshun_Auset]

You seem to be missing a point here.  There literally can be no pre-existing civilization when the Hebrew line begins with the beginning of man and civilization in the garden of Eden.  I realize you don't like to acknowledge this fact.

The only way to beget your theory is to a) call this a biblical myth in which case you can take that up with El Shaddai JAH himself and tell the Almighty you don't believe his letter to you, or b) say that these "pre-existing" peoples you speak of were ape men and that you believe in evolution.  Sadly enough, though, even the most ardent evolutionists have come to realize that humans came from a single pair originally as they've studied the make up of the sex determinant chromosome, specifically the Y.

Because this fact speaks for itself:

Lineage of the Hebrews from Adam & Eve to Jacob

GOD => Adam, Eve
Cain, Abel, Seth
Seth => Noah,
Shem, Ham, Japeth
Ham => Terach => Abraham, Haran
Haran => Lot => Ammon, Moab
Abraham => Rebecca, Issac, Ishmael
Ishmael => JACOB (and Leah, Rachel, Zilpah, Bilhah, Esau)
JACOB => 12 TRIBES...and the Hebrews

While there may have been civilizations that pre-existed prior to the Hebrews there were no people that pre-existed the first two Hebrews, namely Adam and Eve.  


"But the lawless one's presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying sings and portents and with every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of truth that they might be saved.  So that is why God lets an error of operation go to them, that they may get to believing the lie, in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness."  -2nd Thessalonians 2:9-12

You are actually missing my point....Were there not creation stories that were WRITTEN DOWN prior to the Helio Biblio? Do the cultures, especially those AFRICAN cultures, not deserve credit if these stories predate the Helio Biblio?(which they do by thousands of years), And if the stories are extraordinarily similar to those found in the Helio Biblio (that is if one doesn't want to admit the Helio Biblio plagerized the stories) why would anyone choose to not study them and ignore them? Especially considering we are supposed to be trying to recieve some type of enlightenment and consciouseness here?

[out_of_Zion]

I'd be much obliged to read them, but I couldn't find anything of value on the Twa searching the web...at all.  Just stupid blurbs filled with crap I already know.  What little there was about their spirituality just explained it briefly.  Their writings were not on there.

So, if you could direct me to a site or type the account (I'm sure it's not too long?)...that'd be great.  I'm not a closed minded fundamentalist nazi-esque Xtian.  I do read the Qur'an and I've read bits of Buddhist writings, Tao te Ching, and tribal myths and parables that I've encountered in books (specifically Joseph Campbell's "Hero With a Thousand Faces").

[seshatasefekht7]

peace and hotep,

You seem to be missing a point here.  There literally can be no pre-existing civilization when the Hebrew line begins with the beginning of man and civilization in the garden of Eden.  I realize you don't like to acknowledge this fact. ............................................................................................................................................................................Because this fact speaks for itself

all these facts are allegory.


out of zion the bible has a chronology based on math. the introduction of the patriarchs can not preceed 4000bc. civilizations existed prior to that point.

faith without works is dead?

......and zion comes later.

seth was the god of war
the god of adam and eve was the god of ignorance that  forbade eating of the tree of knowledge which was the knowledge of good and evil. the god of barbarism is ignorance.

jacob/yacub was a hyksos king......
 

remember the rosetta stone
and now the writing on the wall  

freedomisahapislave

[out_of_Zion]

the introduction of the patriarchs can not preceed 4000bc. civilizations existed prior to that point.

There is absolutely no solid evidence that civilizations existed more than 6,000 years ago.  The only evidence that does exist lies is the foolish hypothesis of anthropologists who base their entire foundation on the inaccuracies of C-14 dating.  Assyria & Egypt are the two oldest known civilizations and both are thought by most reputable scholars to be about 5,000 years old.

http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Ancient_religions/Mesopotamia/timeline_of_assyria.htm

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/TIMELINE.HTM

Both those links show the true beginning of documented civilization.  5000 years ago, 3000 BC, 1000 years after Adam and Eva...

faith without works is dead?

......and zion comes later.

OK, you're quoting James, but why?  Of course faith without works is dead, much as the body without the spirit is dead.

the god of adam and eve was the god of ignorance that  forbade eating of the tree of knowledge which was the knowledge of good and evil.

So many make such comments, but what was the purpose of Jehovah telling them not to eat of the tree and the whole account - or parable if you prefer to believe it as allegorical (most do because they've feel it's foolish to accept this as literal since it's so misunderstood)?  It was done to see if Adam and Eve would accept his sovreignty.  We find later in Job that Satan had been "roving about in the earth" (Job 1:7) and we know that before Adam and Eve rebelled, there was the original Satan, which means slanderer.  So Satan then began his attempt to prove that he  could entice others to rebel against  God's sovreignty, not against ignorance itself.  Because how did the fruit change them?  Did it really provide them with what Satan promised it would that their "eyes would be opened and they would BE LIKE GOD" (Gen 3:5)?  No.  Their eyes were opened, but it did not make them "like God!"  No, ironically it made them unlike God!  They lost their pure and holy states and gave way to shame in their nakedness (Gen 3:7).  Whether this is interpreted as literal or as a parable, Almighty God is not attempting to shelter man in ignorance.  Rather, he is attempting to see if his creatures would obey him of their own free will or manifest the rebellious spirit of Satan.

Anything else?  

[out_of_Zion]

Note: We both made an errant statement I just realized this morning.  Bible chronology takes us back NEARLY 7,000 years just as the Egyptian link does to 5,000 BC...I think it totals up to like 6800-something, I'd have to research it.  Fact remains, I believe the accounts of Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, and Dueteronomy to be factual not mythological.

[iyah360]

I'd be much obliged to read them, but I couldn't find anything of value on the Twa searching the web...at all.  Just stupid blurbs filled with crap I already know.  What little there was about their spirituality just explained it briefly.  Their writings were not on there.

So, if you could direct me to a site or type the account (I'm sure it's not too long?)...that'd be great.  I'm not a closed minded fundamentalist nazi-esque Xtian.  I do read the Qur'an and I've read bits of Buddhist writings, Tao te Ching, and tribal myths and parables that I've encountered in books (specifically Joseph Campbell's "Hero With a Thousand Faces").

Here is a link to a rare book entitled "Egypt, Light of the World" by Gerald Massey . . . this is one of the most thorough accounts available(that I have seen) in the West and North of the mythological and religious systems of the inner African peoples and the evolution of these systems in the Nile Valley civilizations.

http://www.theosophical.ca/AncientEgyptIntroduction.htm

Also check out "Pygmy Kitabu" by Jean Pierre Hallet & Alex Pelle, another out of print book(which you can purchase as a used copy on Amazon.com ) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0394462858/qid=1082466522/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-4486950-8448146?v=glance&s=books

It would be good as well to check out books by Albert Churchward available here:

http://www.rastafarispeaks.com/books/african.html

All of these aformentioned authors are white researchers and I have recommended these because in this racist climate, some people tend to discredit Black scholars as being self-interested and incapable of being "objective" enough to take too seriously in these areas. I encourage you to challenge that presumption and also check out books by John Jackson, Yosef ben-Jochannan, Cheikh Anta Diop also available at the previous link. Comparing and contrasting white researchers work with that of Black researchers will also bring to light some racist assumptions of the white researchers, who although thoroughly delve into the subject matter, cannot help but to whiten their findings with their pre-existing racial perceptions.

[Oshun_Auset]

Thank you Iyah 360 for putting refferences, you beat me to it...I will also give some "Euorpean/White" researchers(for the same reason) and the first one happens also to be an Askenaz Jew, Biblical historian and Egyptologist, who actually has books that lay the Biblical story(old and new testaments) and/or phrases right next to the Babylonian and Egyptian one's they were plagerized from, for all to see...


101 Myths of the Bible: How Ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History
by Gary Greenberg

The Moses Mystery: The African Origins of the Jewish People
by Gary Greenberg

The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold
by Acharya S

Kersey Graves: The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors
the online version(so convenient)
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/kersey_graves/16/index.shtml

By the way...The entire scene of a man eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge and a woman giving the fruit to the man is depicted in stone on the Philae Temple to Auset(Isis) at Aswan in Egypt...of course it wasn't a negative story then...The woman/goddess was bestowing knowledge upon the king/pharoh...meaning only could the king be legitamate through the knowledge of the woman/goddess Auset...quite powerful, so the patriarchal Hebrews had to twist it...and make the feminine principle evil and suspect...Khnum(creation Neteru) can also be seen fashioning man out of clay...Any of this sound familiar?

If you want the visual you can order videotapes of it through this site(they are done by an African who studied under Dr. Ben) ...or of couse you could travel up(south) the nile(Hapi) yourself...KNOW THYSELF.

http://www.kemetnu.com/videos/page2.html

Did anyone know that "Ra" in Hebrew means "bad"....just an interesting side note.

By the way Out of Zion...I understand you don't want your faith to be shaken...but God gave us brains to question things...I noticed you completely ignored my questions. I find that a little suspect. I'm not trying to insult you, but we are on a site called Africa Speaks...and this African will continue to do so...and bring justice to my African ancestors Stolen Legacy(pun intended for the well read)...

Mo fi sin Olorun!

[seshatasefekht7]

peace and hotep,

OK, you're quoting James, but why?  Of course faith without works is dead, much as the body without the spirit is dead.

"but why?", out of zion asks.

wasn't lucifer kikked out of zion? or was that just heaven?

i alway hear people talking bad about scientific methods while they type away on laptops or pc's which are generated by scientific methods that include mathematics.

dating methods are  math-based, not faith-based.

please do not take advantage of logic on one hand and then retreat to illogic on the other hand unless you are admitting that technology is really SUTECHnology.

just resign yourself to the primitive culture of ignorance reserved for the  worshippers of the barbaric culture of adam and eve.

nakedness refers to naked.

naked. adj
1 witheout clothing, nude
2 witheout covering esp the usual covering: a naked sword
3 DEVOID of vegetation, stripped bare
4 witheout ADDITION, concealment, disguise or
  or embellishment: the naked FACTS
5 DEVOID  of something specified: naked of all pretense/act
  pretending
6 defenseless, vunerable
7 LAW- UNSUPPORTED OR UNCORROBORATED BY AUTHORITY  
  ,EVIDENCE, OR PROOF




a barbarian god only require the services of ignorant warriors.  adam and eve only marks  the reintroduction of an anthropomorphicly challenge africans who are re-entering the southern hemisphere. withe their deprived butts.

we know that before Adam and Eve rebelled, there was the original Satan, which means slanderer

who in the heck is we? alright third person thingy.....huh

does ones worship a creator that is not in absolute control?
a fearful but sometimes merciful  GAD?

i do not.

freedomisahapislave

[gman]

Referring to the thing about how there is no evidence of civilization over 6000 years ago... civilization has existed ever since there were human beings which is much, much longer than 6000 years. Unless you define civilization as building gigantic buildings and writing things down. I guess my definition is a bit broader.
Now referring back to an earlier thread where outofzion justifies the slaughter of Israel's old enemies by saying they "were not peaceful people"... let me tell you a story Out of Zion, it's an ugly story but it's true, you can tell me your opinion later.
In the early 60s in Guyana there were what are referred to as "race riots" between persons of African descent vs. people of East Indian descent. Really it was more like a civil war than 'riots'. I won't bother going into the background other than to say that the British had done a good job of pitting us against one another, politicians on both sides didn't help, and people were basically fighting over who would get to control the soon-to-be independent country.
OK here is the story- when she was a little girl, an acquaintance of my family lived in an all-African village in Guyana, situated next to an all-Indian village. One night people came from the Indian village and started setting everyone's houses on fire with them still inside. The little girl and some of her family escaped by jumping out the window. Later on the survivors regrouped and planned a counterattack. They gathered all their cutlasses, knives and firearms, entered the Indian village, and killed every living thing larger than an insect in that village. Men, women, children, dogs, cats, chickens, everyone and everything that breathed in that village was hacked to death.
So Outofzion, were they justified in that? After all, these were not "peaceful people". They had just tried to burn them alive. Oh, and they worshipped strange gods too, just like the canaanites etc.
Hmmm but then again maybe the Indians were retaliating for some previous attack on them when they burned everyone's houses... maybe they were justified huh? Maybe the little girl's family weren't "peaceful people" either so the Indians were justified in roasting them alive?
So Outofzion, who was right here... the Africans or Indians? Or could it be... perhaps... that they were both wrong, and that indiscriminately slaughtering whole families of people is unjustifiable, whether you're in biblical times or the present day???
[I can think of one exception to this, which was Nat Turner and other slave revolts, I could explain why I think they are exceptions some other time if you like, but now... I must sleep.]