Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
NOAH and the deluge:

I start by saying the whole earth was not flooded over. That is to say it did not look like a blue ball from space at the time noah was said to have existed, to times much earlier. Secondly, who was there to chronicle this phenomena? As was stated before, we find flood stories all over the globe. Hermopolitan flood stories, south sea island flood stories, y'all have mentioned gilgemesh[sp?] already, and in other kemetan literature. All predating noah's flood. Just because nyc exist doesn't mean spiderman existed.

(had go back in the books for this)

Noah in old hebrew is made up of 2 characters "NUN" and "CHED" translated as noach. We don't now the original vowel sounds, for hebrew text didn't use vowels (the same is said regarding kemetan writings). At best, we surmise.

NUN, the 1st letter used in the hebrew name -noah- interestingly we find nun to be a deity in kemetan lore, which represents the flood of creation who also guides a boat, or what has been referred to as "solar boat", across the waters, which carried the other deities of the ogdoad. Nun symbolized the flood and was portrayed in anthropomorphic form.

In the hermopolitan creation myth, we find four males and females that emerged from a primeval flood stepping onto the "first" piece of land. Liking to that of the noah story where we find 4 males and females emerging from a global flood after a mountain arose from the sea.

SHEM "SHM", I discovered, means "name"? He was named, "Name"? However, word shem also forms the root of the word "shemoneh" meaning "eight'.
Hermopolis, as the greeks called it was called shm by the kemetans meaning "8-town" after the eight deities that emerged from the flood.

HAM "CHEM" or "CHM" in hebrew derives from the word kmt. It is still up to debate as to whether Kmt "the black land" is in regard to the fertile black soil from the yearly flood of the nile after the water recedes or its indigenous inhabitants. To me, it really doesn't matter, for we know who the originals were.

Japheth, we find in old hebrew, that its made up of 3 consonants "j-ph-th", were the "ph" and the "th" were the sounds are linguistically close to "p" and "t". In hebrew we find the j is used in combination with 'god' for 'god's' name, i.e. "ja" or "jo". We find the "pt" part of "j-ph" in used in the memphite creator deity known as ptah.

Linguistically japheth appears to be equivalent to 'god-ptah', which may suggest the frequent use of the hebrew term "lord god".

Call it all coincidence, I'm not stopping anyone from doing so, however we see here how noah & sons resemble an older hermopolitan creation myth story.

Noah - nun, primeval flood
Ham - kmt, signifies the first land to emerge from water (or land of the blacks? 19)
Shem -shm, representing a city, hermopolis, called shm by kemetans -8 town. A city built on the first land (to emerge from water).
Japheth, correlates with a primary deity; which can be seen to parallel the hermopolitan ogdoad and ptah.



You did a good job breaking down the roots of the names and this gives credence to what I said above regarding how names change and evolve...For example look at how you broke down the name Ham and discovered it actually comes from KMT..this ties in perfectly with the fact that one of Hams sons founded what we know to be Kemet/Egypt...this is just the point I've been making all along.

Now I hope I've answered all your questions if not send me a PM if you don't mind. Because I would like for Oshun to answer the previous questions I laid out for her in my last post...nothing personal I just don't want our rhythm disrupted.
[/QUOTE]

Why are you historizing/literalizing obviously borrowed Hebrew 'names' from an obviously non-literal(read symbolic) KMTic creation myth that didn't denote any historic/literal individuals? How can you skip past this evidence that Hebrew 'history' was fabricated by cutting and pasting things from earlier KMTic(and other) myths?

quote:
For example look at how you broke down the name Ham and discovered it actually comes from KMT..this ties in perfectly with the fact that one of Hams sons founded what we know to be Kemet/Egypt


This above logic is flawed. How could their be literal 'son's' of Ham that founded KMT, when the word Ham itself was 'borrowed' from a KMT-ic word that DOESN'T denote a literal person/individual. The latter can't found the former, that's a reversal in historical order. Son's of the Black land can't found that land... The son's of a founder, named after the foundation, aren't 'the' founder themselves.

And that's just this one word... all the other words above point to the fact that the Hebrew 'tribes' weren't literal, but rather 'borrowed/invented' symbols of primeval forces of nature(not historical people) from other myths. You can't have it both ways.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:

You did a good job breaking down the roots of the names and this gives credence to what I said above regarding how names change and evolve...For example look at how you broke down the name Ham and discovered it actually comes from KMT..this ties in perfectly with the fact that one of Hams sons founded what we know to be Kemet/Egypt...this is just the point I've been making all along.

Now I hope I've answered all your questions if not send me a PM if you don't mind. Because I would like for Oshun to answer the previous questions I laid out for her in my last post...nothing personal I just don't want our rhythm disrupted.


Why are you historizing/literalizing obviously borrowed Hebrew 'names' from an obviously non-literal(read symbolic) KMTic creation myth that didn't denote any historic/literal individuals? How can you skip past this evidence that Hebrew 'history' was fabricated by cutting and pasting things from earlier KMTic(and other) myths?


Oshun, apparently you are out of steam with regard to your OWN questions so you have to keep hiding behind OTHER peoples...Ok that being the case I will accept your constant referring to others peoples questions as such. Therefore I will view your presence in this thread from now on as nothing more than an auxiliary one and that you are no longer a major contributor because your OWN position has been effectively negated. Anyway, to answer the question you posed ( *note* I do this for the benefit of readers who may need clarification not because I owe it to you).

To the readers you must realize that the historic records of the first Black civilizations and their founders is not exclusive to the Hebrews, Egyptians, Sumerians or Mesopotamians. They all have their own versions of the same events but the fact of the matter is they were all BLACK civilizations from the SAME geographical, and genetic lineage. These groups did NOT exist in a vacuum and they shared cultures, historic records and myths all the time. When you see a historic account or name show up in Hebrew culture that also shows up in Egyptian culture that does NOT mean that the Hebrews 'stole' it...Anymore than if you see historic records and names that show up in Egyptian culture that came from the Ancient Mesopotamian/Sumerian civilization that predated it.

This is what Oshun does not seem to want to understand these cultures are NOT mutually exclusive meaning that the existence of one does not negate the existence of the other. True, Hebrew culture borrowed a lot from Egypt (never said it didn't) but that doesn't negate the FACT that the Hebrews had their OWN culture. The shared historic records between these cultures BOND them as BLACK cultures it does not SEPARATE them. That's why you have a retelling of the same stories, names and historic records these traditions simply OVERLAP they don't CONFLICT....if anyone doesn't see that it's simply because they don't want to since it conflicts with their own particular spin of history.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
For example look at how you broke down the name Ham and discovered it actually comes from KMT..this ties in perfectly with the fact that one of Hams sons founded what we know to be Kemet/Egypt


This above logic is flawed. How could their be literal 'son's' of Ham that founded KMT, when the word Ham itself was 'borrowed' from a KMT-ic word that DOESN'T denote a literal person/individual. The latter can't found the former, that's a reversal in historical order. Son's of the Black land can't found that land... The son's of a founder, named after the foundation, aren't 'the' founder themselves.

And that's just this one word... all the other words above point to the fact that the Hebrew 'tribes' weren't literal, but rather 'borrowed/invented' symbols of primeval forces of nature(not historical people) from other myths. You can't have it both ways.



The above logic is not flawed the only point I was making was the fact that the word Hamite comes from KMT proves the link between Egyptian and Hebrew culture that I outlined above. Regarding your statement that the word KEMET did not denote a man my question to you is how do you know? Land and civilizations were often named after it's founders for example ancient KUSH was named after Cush and the land of Canaan was named after it's founder Canaan. The fact that one of Ham's/Kemet's SONS founded Egypt changes nothing...I mean it's not like a son never took the name of his father before is it? Although the Hebrew name for Ancient Egypt was Mizraim and the record says that he was Ham's son....however that is just the Hebrew translation but it doesn't mean that one of Ham's/Kemet's sons didn't found it...I mean SOMEBODY had to found it in the LITERAL sense after all it did/does EXIST.

Besides, you keep insisting that everything is always "symbols of primeval forces of nature" this is what is REALLY logically flawed. Because the FACT is that LITERAL people DID exist and I don't see you giving ANY literal accounts or historic records that even come close to giving your rendition of the ACTUAL history of the origin of ancient peoples the way the Bible does. Until you present a detailed account or historically verifiable record of the ancient people that existed in that area at that time I can only deem your belief as conjecture and the Biblical record is as good as any....explaining away everything as simply "symbols of primeval forces of nature" just isn't going to get it...Since we all know that at some point in time these people HAD to come from somewhere and that's LITERAL not "SYMBOLIC."




So lets get back to where we left off before all these distractions.... Do you care to take a stab at the questions I presented to you the way I just did?....here I'll even go easy on you and just post them one at a time even though there is a total of five I need answered.

Here you go....




quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:

Now My questions to you are as follows.....


1) When you said this...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
"The hyksos were already there... Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic."
....

In response to my point regarding the FACT that Akhenaten introduced a Patriarchical, monotheistic, faith to Africa were you suggesting that the Hyksos (who even if they were there had not come to power yet) weilded more power and influence than Akhenathen the KING....in his own country? Then when you added the "Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic" part were you aware that Akhenatens wife was none other than Nefertiti? if so why did you not call her by her name in lieu of simply designating her "Akhenatens wife"....That seems quite odd for someone to do who is championing "the devine feminine".

Also even if she was 'Asiatic' (which she wasn't) but even if she was what does that have to do with Akhenaten introducing a Patriarchical, monotheistic religion to Egypt?....Lastly, since you said this was "Per Dr. Ben" what proof does he use to support these claims? are there sources other than Dr. Ben himself in which I can verify such information?
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:

You did a good job breaking down the roots of the names and this gives credence to what I said above regarding how names change and evolve...For example look at how you broke down the name Ham and discovered it actually comes from KMT..this ties in perfectly with the fact that one of Hams sons founded what we know to be Kemet/Egypt...this is just the point I've been making all along.

Now I hope I've answered all your questions if not send me a PM if you don't mind. Because I would like for Oshun to answer the previous questions I laid out for her in my last post...nothing personal I just don't want our rhythm disrupted.


Why are you historizing/literalizing obviously borrowed Hebrew 'names' from an obviously non-literal(read symbolic) KMTic creation myth that didn't denote any historic/literal individuals? How can you skip past this evidence that Hebrew 'history' was fabricated by cutting and pasting things from earlier KMTic(and other) myths?


Oshun, apparently you are out of steam with regard to your OWN questions so you have to keep hiding behind OTHER peoples...Ok that being the case I will accept your constant referring to others peoples questions as such. Therefore I will view your presence in this thread from now on as nothing more than an auxiliary one and that you are no longer a major contributor because your OWN position has been effectively negated. Anyway, to answer the question you posed ( *note* I do this for the benefit of readers who may need clarification not because I owe it to you).

To the readers you must realize that the historic records of the first Black civilizations and their founders is not exclusive to the Hebrews, Egyptians, Sumerians or Mesopotamians. They all have their own versions of the same events but the fact of the matter is they were all BLACK civilizations from the SAME geographical, and genetic lineage. These groups did NOT exist in a vacuum and they shared cultures, historic records and myths all the time. When you see a historic account or name show up in Hebrew culture that also shows up in Egyptian culture that does NOT mean that the Hebrews 'stole' it...Anymore than if you see historic records and names that show up in Egyptian culture that came from the Ancient Mesopotamian/Sumerian civilization that predated it.


The Hebraic names are NOT HISTORIC in the pre-Hebraic records... That is the point that you are missing. TheHNebraic names that are created from borrowed from earlier MYTH are based on non literalist/historic powers of nature. It's quite obvious in Raptors post(which actually piggy backed what I was referencing in "101 Myths of the Bible" BTW).

quote:
This is what Oshun does not seem to want to understand these cultures are NOT mutually exclusive meaning that the existence of one does not negate the existence of the other.


The pre-existance of an ancient story that is symbolic for natural allegory CANNOT be literalized and personified later as actual history. What don't you overstand about that?

quote:
[/b]True, Hebrew culture borrowed a lot from Egypt (never said it didn't) but that doesn't negate the FACT that the Hebrews had their OWN culture. The shared historic records between these cultures BOND them as BLACK cultures it does not SEPARATE them.


The Hermapolitan teachings are supposed to be historical record? Are you serious?

quote:
That's why you have a retelling of the same stories, names and historic records these traditions simply OVERLAP they don't CONFLICT....if anyone doesn't see that it's simply because they don't want to since it conflicts with their own particular spin of history.


If anyone knows anything about African spiritual systems outside of Hebraic literalism, they would know that the natural allegories that pre-date the Hebrews, that were later converted into a psuedo-historical record, cannot be taken literally... because they were never taught by the master teachers as literal.

quote:
The above logic is not flawed the only point I was making was the fact that the word Hamite comes from KMT proves the link between Egyptian and Hebrew culture that I outlined above.



Nobody is arguing the 'link in cultures', but you aren't acknowledging that natural allegory of KMT is being flipped into historical record, an that you are accepting it as LITERAL... Which makes absolutely no sense.

quote:
Regarding your statement that the word KEMET did not denote a man my question to you is how do you know?


I didn't say KMT doesn't denote a man(even though all evidence point to it denoting land or people), I said Ham CAN'T denote a literal man because it is derived from an earlier source which is clearly spelled out... Just like all the other 'names' you have literalized for some reason... Therefor it is ilogical to use them to describe the different lineages of man. The ogdoad(primeval) powers are not literal people. Do you overstand what that means?

quote:
Land and and civilizations were often named after it's founders for example ancient KUSH was named after Cush and the land of Canaan was named after it's founder Canaan. The fact that one of Ham's/Kemet's SONS founded Egypt changes nothing...I mean it's not like a son never took the name of his father before is it? Although the Hebrew name for Ancient Egypt was Mizraim and the record says that he was Ham's son....however that is just the Hebrew translation but it doesn't mean that one of Ham's/Kemet's sons didn't found it...I mean SOMEBODY had to found it in the LITERAL sense after all it did/does EXIST.


That was a creative albeit painful literalist spin to read. I don't think you overstood what I actually said in my post. Nor do I think you are familiar with the FACT that the Kamau mysteries are allegory nd they have a separate and well documented historical record.

quote:
Besides, you keep insisting that everything is always "symbols of primeval forces of nature" this is what is REALLY logically flawed. Because the FACT is that LITERAL people DID exist and I don't see you giving ANY literal accounts or historic records that even come close to giving your rendition of the ACTUAL history of the origin of ancient peoples the way the Bible does. Until you present a detailed account or historically verifiable record of the ancient people that existed in that area at that time I can only deem your belief as conjecture and the Biblical record is as good as any....explaining away everything as simply "symbols of primeval forces of nature" just isn't going to get it...Since we all know that at some point in time these people HAD to come from somewhere and that's LITERAL not "SYMBOLIC."


You want me to misuse the allegorical teachings of our ancestors and turn them into historic record, which is not what they were ever intended to be or do. I would never participate in such injustices. We have plenty of historical records of the dynastic periods . There is no need to pervert entirely separate spiritual myths to comfort those who have been mislead by Biblical literalism.

quote:
[QUOTE] So lets get back to where we left off before all these distractions.... Do you care to take a stab at the questions I presented to you the way I just did?....here I'll even go easy on you and just post them one at a time even though there is a total of five I need answered.

Here you go....




[QUOTE]Originally posted by LieDecrypter:

Now My questions to you are as follows.....


1) When you said this...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
"The hyksos were already there... Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic."
....

In response to my point regarding the FACT that Akhenaten introduced a Patriarchical, monotheistic, faith to Africa were you suggesting that the Hyksos (who even if they were there had not come to power yet) weilded more power and influence than Akhenathen the KING....in his own country? Then when you added the "Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic" part were you aware that Akhenatens wife was none other than Nefertiti? if so why did you not call her by her name in lieu of simply designating her "Akhenatens wife"....That seems quite odd for someone to do who is championing "the devine feminine".[/ quote]

The devine feminine are powers of nature, not literal women, although we can manifest them, but so can men. I was pointing out that the Hyksos, a.k.a foreign Asiatic invaders were present PRIOR to and during Akhenaten's reign. You were arguing 'in that other thread' that when he established his monotheistic religion 'there were no Asiatic foreigner present'. I pointed out that even his wife was an Asiatic per Dr. Ben. So your premise of no Asiatic influence was DEAD WRONG.

quote:
Also even if she was 'Asiatic' (which she wasn't) but even if she was what does that have to do with Akhenaten introducing a Patriarchical, monotheistic religion to Egypt?....Lastly, since you said this was "Per Dr. Ben" what proof does he use to support these claims? are there sources other than Dr. Ben himself in which I can verify such information?


You know Dr. Ben uses all kinds of sources... You claim to have read his books so I'm shocked that you haven't seen the references yourself. If I find the time I will look through the stacks... But I was pointing out in 'the original thread' that you were obviously unaware of, or completely skipping past the presence of the Hyksos. At the time you just kept mentioning Arabs over and over...

I've stated all of the above before, so what exactly are you constantly complaining about in this and other threads, that I supposedly didn't answer? Now your character is in question...
quote:
The devine feminine are powers of nature, not literal women, although we can manifest them, but so can men.


Greetings:
I would like to affirm this statement by Oshun Auset. And if that premise is accepted, I want to ask Semitic/Hebraic followists in which way this Divine Feminine is ACKNOWLEDGED and AFFIRMED in your culture and/or writs?

I hope we are mature enough to admit that the development of "Chosenisms" are a result of an inferiority complex. We should also be open-minded and honest enough to see that White Male Supremacy is but a graduate of semitic worldview. Check the foundations of white/male supremacy and you will see absolute similarities.

I already know that egotistical attachments to faith/beliefs cause us to deny certain truths, especially truths that challenge or complicate our comfy religious foundations. This is the poisoning of hierarchy as associated with religion. Hierarchy and Religion combine to make the psychological equivalent of meth-amphetamine.

If there is a desire to express TRUTH and not rumor of truth solely based on Writ, please engage my concerns.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The Hebraic names are NOT HISTORIC in the pre-Hebraic records... That is the point that you are missing. TheHNebraic names that are created from borrowed from earlier MYTH are based on non literalist/historic powers of nature. It's quite obvious in Raptors post(which actually piggy backed what I was referencing in "101 Myths of the Bible" BTW).

I'm saying that names overlapped are you saying that the whole of Hebrew culture is myth?



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The pre-existance of an ancient story that is symbolic for natural allegory CANNOT be literalized and personified later as actual history. What don't you overstand about that?


You keep acting like EVERYTHING in the Bible is based on ancient allegories and that simply is untrue

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The Hermapolitan teachings are supposed to be historical record? Are you serious?


Nobody said anything like that (another classic reddherring)...but are you serious that the whole of Hebraic record is myth with NO history of it's own


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
If anyone knows anything about African spiritual systems outside of Hebraic literalism, they would know that the natural allegories that pre-date the Hebrews, that were later converted into a psuedo-historical record, cannot be taken literally... because they were never taught by the master teachers as literal.


Again if everything is 'natural allegory' then at what point did LITERAL record keeping begin?

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Nobody is arguing the 'link in cultures', but you aren't acknowledging that natural allegory of KMT is being flipped into historical record, an that you are accepting it as LITERAL... Which makes absolutely no sense.


That because you keep acting like ALL of Hebrew history is based on myth which makes now sense because they had to at some point have their OWN history with which to record no?

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I didn't say KMT doesn't denote a man(even though all evidence point to it denoting land or people), I said Ham CAN'T denote a literal man because it is derived from an earlier source which is clearly spelled out... Just like all the other 'names' you have literalized for some reason... Therefor it is ilogical to use them to describe the different lineages of man. The ogdoad(primeval) powers are not literal people. Do you overstand what that means?


Then provide us with a record or lineage that explains the fact that we have LITERAL people walking around that is not SYMBOLIC

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
That was a creative albeit painful literalist spin to read. I don't think you overstood what I actually said in my post. Nor do I think you are familiar with the FACT that the Kamau mysteries are allegory nd they have a separate and well documented historical record.


I understand and overstand it but you are going too far in your assertion that this history is only allegory

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
You want me to misuse the allegorical teachings of our ancestors and turn them into historic record, which is not what they were ever intended to be or do. I would never participate in such injustices. We have plenty of historical records of the dynastic periods . There is no need to pervert entirely separate spiritual myths to comfort those who have been mislead by Biblical literalism.


Neither that link or what you said have anything to do with the overall point I'm making which is to in fact give proper credit to ALL of our ancestors not just Egypt



quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:

Now My questions to you are as follows.....


1) When you said this...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
"The hyksos were already there... Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic."
....

In response to my point regarding the FACT that Akhenaten introduced a Patriarchical, monotheistic, faith to Africa were you suggesting that the Hyksos (who even if they were there had not come to power yet) weilded more power and influence than Akhenathen the KING....in his own country? Then when you added the "Per Dr. Ben, Ankenaten's wife was also Asiatic" part were you aware that Akhenatens wife was none other than Nefertiti? if so why did you not call her by her name in lieu of simply designating her "Akhenatens wife"....That seems quite odd for someone to do who is championing "the devine feminine".[/ quote]

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The devine feminine are powers of nature, not literal women, although we can manifest them, but so can men. I was pointing out that the Hyksos, a.k.a foreign Asiatic invaders were present PRIOR to and during Akhenaten's reign. You were arguing 'in that other thread' that when he established his monotheistic religion 'there were no Asiatic foreigner present'. I pointed out that even his wife was an Asiatic per Dr. Ben. So your premise of no Asiatic influence was DEAD WRONG.



[b]Oshun, I would really appreciate if you answer the question that I asked and not creat your own questions with which to answer...Again what does any of that has to due with my core question? Which shows that Akhenaten HIMSELF started the religion NOT the hyksos or his "wife"


quote:
Also even if she was 'Asiatic' (which she wasn't) but even if she was what does that have to do with Akhenaten introducing a Patriarchical, monotheistic religion to Egypt?....Lastly, since you said this was "Per Dr. Ben" what proof does he use to support these claims? are there sources other than Dr. Ben himself in which I can verify such information?[/b]


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
You know Dr. Ben uses all kinds of sources... You claim to have read his books so I'm shocked that you haven't seen the references yourself. If I find the time I will look through the stacks... But I was pointing out in 'the original thread' that you were obviously unaware of, or completely skipping past the presence of the Hyksos. At the time you just kept mentioning Arabs over and over...

I've stated all of the above before, so what exactly are you constantly complaining about in this and other threads, that I supposedly didn't answer? Now your character is in question...


Again share these sources...and yes I'm familar with the good Doctors works which is why they were among the ones I recommended to Heru...


A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan

We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon

The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon

The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds

African Glory: The Story of Vanished Negro Civilizations - J.C. deGraft-Johnson.

Hebrewisms of West Africa - Joseph J. Williams
My use of the term 'Akhenaten's wife' is a non-issue, she is is wife no? You said your use of the Greeks terms Isis, Osiris, and Horus was a non-issue, and I find that far more problematic. You can easily tell I knew exacly who I was talking about(do a search on her name on here if you wish, I've posted before at length), and I assumed that your obvious familiarity with Akhenaten meant you knew who he was married to. So what is your point exactly? Or is this further distraction for a seperate purpose?

We will never have a meeting of the minds on this subject because I am a general non-literalist with spiritual sciences, as paractitioners and aspiring adepts of awo(mystery) are taught/trained to be, and you are a Biblical literalist. Our ancestors made SPEPERATE historical records from their spiritual sciences(nature allegories) where they deamed it necessary, particularly in the case of KMT, where there is an over abundance. There is no need to make a nature allegory serve a purpose it was not meant to, unless a people had to 'invent' history.

I would add these books to the list...

"Ancient Egypt: Light of the World" By Gerald Massey

"Natural Genesis," by Geral Massey

"Blacks in Antiquity" Snowden

"Anacalypsis" vols 1 and 2 G. Higgins,

"Moses and Ankenaten" A. Osman

"The Apocrypha" M Komroff,

"Toth, Architect of the Universe", R. Ellis

"The Bible Myth" G. Greenberg,

"Historical Deception" M Gadalla,

"Black Spark, White Fire" R. Poe,

"The meaning of Masonry"

"Exiled Egyptians in the heart of Africa" M Gadalla,

"The Cosmic Serpent" J Narby,

"The Pale Fox" M Griaule & Dieterien, "V

"Voodoo: Africa's Secret Power" Gert Chesi,

"Encyclopedia of African Nations and Civilizations by Diagram Group published by Facts on File Library of World History,

"Encyclopedia of African Peoples" by Diagram Group published by Facts on File Library of World History,

"101 Myths of the Bible: How Ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History" Gary Greenburg,

"Of Water and the Spirit" by Patrice Malidoma Somé

ALL BOOKS BY DR. YOSEF BEN JOCHANNAN

including "Black Man of the Nile and His Family"

and "African Origins of Major 'Western Religions'"

ALL BOOKS BY ISHAKAMUSA BARASHANGO

"The Ethiopian book of life" edited and translated by Sir E.A. Wallis Budge,

"Book of Enoch",

"THE METAPHYSICAL BIBLE DICTIONARY" by Charles

"The Alphabet versus the Goddess" by Leon Shlain,

"Biblical History" by Gary Greenberg,

"Ifism: the Complete Works of Orunmila (all volumes),

"The handbook of yoruba religious concepts: Baba ifa Karade

"Healing power of sacrifice" Chief Priest Yemi Elebuibon,

"Let the circle be unbroken: the implications of african spirituality in the diaspora" Marimba Ani (pretext to Yurugu),

"When God was a Woman" by Merlin Stone,

"Maat, the 11 laws of god" Ra Un Nefer Amen,

"Return to the african mother principle of male and female equality" Oba T'Shaka,

"Iwa Pele" by Falokun Fatunmbi,

"African Religiions and philosohy" John Mbiti,

"Yoruba Culture: a philisophical account" Kola Abimbola,

"The Historical Origin of Christianity" Walter Williams,

"Healing Wisdom of Africa" Malidoma Patrice Some,

"Metu Neter Vol 1: The great oracle of tehuti and the egyptian system of spiritual cultivation: ra un nefer amen,

"Metu Neter Vol 2: anuk ausar, the kamitic initiation system" ra un nefer amen,

"The destruction of civilization: great issues of race from 4500 b.c. to 2000 a.d." chancellor williams,

"Introduction to african civilization" John g. Jackson,

"The world's 16 saviors" Kersey Graves, ALL BOOKS BY CHEIKH ANTA DIOP,

"The Element Encyclopedia of Witchcraft": The Complete A-Z for the Entire Magical World

"Ifa Will Mend Our Broken World" By Wande Abimbola,

"Fundamentals of the Yoruba Religion" by Chief Fama, "Black Gods- Orisa Studies" by John Mason,

"Yoruba Culture: A Philosophical account" By Kola Abimbola,

"Olodumare: God in Yourba Belief" by E. Bolaylldowu B.D PH.D, "

Finding Soul on the Path of Orisa" by Tobe Melora Correal,

"The Hero with a Thousand Faces" by Joseph Campbell

It is not the ancient legends that tell us lies! The men who created them did not deal falsely with us by nature. All the falsity lies in their having been falsified through ignorantly mistaking mythology for divine revelation and allegory for historic truth. Geology was not taught among the mysteries of ancient knowledge, floating fragments of which have drifted down to us in the Book of Genesis. The Christian world assumed that it was--or, at least, some sort of globe-making--and therefore it was found to be entirely opposed to scientific geology. - Gerald Massey
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
My use of the term 'Akhenaten's wife' is a non-issue, she is is wife no? You said your use of the Greeks terms Isis, Osiris, and Horus was a non-issue, and I find that far more problematic. You can easily tell I knew exacly who I was talking about(do a search on her name on here if you wish, I've posted before at length), and I assumed that your obvious familiarity with Akhenaten meant you knew who he was married to. So what is your point exactly? Or is this further distraction for a seperate purpose?


In this instance your use of the term 'Akhenaten's wife' is pertinent because you are making a specific claim with regard to her identity. You are claiming that she is "Asiatic" so that being the case it's important to know who she is so that this claim can be verified. The point is, a historical figure as widely know as Nefertiti should be referred to by name... True she was indeed "his wife" but it makes no sense whatsoever to refer to Nefertiti (who is arguably more widely known than even Akhenaten himself) as simply "his wife" most Blacks have heard of her (They also identify her as BLACK) but not everybody knows she was Akhenatens wife. So the way I see it there are only two reason why you would not properly identify her... A) You really did not know Akhenatens wife was Nefertiti despite the fact that you had heard of her. Or B) You were aware that Nefertiti was Akhenatens wife...but you knew if you called her by name your claim that she was "Asiatic" would have been obviously false and everyone could see that...so you chose the more covert designation "Akhenaten's wife" instead.

This isn't even the main point though, the real issue is how you keep avoiding the FACT that it was Akhenaten (not some "foreign invaders" as you keep claiming) who started monotheism in Africa. No amount of you blaming the Hyksos or you trying to throw Nefertiti under the chariot as being "Asiatic" is going to change that. I don't know why you are even trying to pull such a stunt it's only making you look bad and everyone can see it... so you really need to stop and just come clean.




quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
We will never have a meeting of the minds on this subject because I am a general non-literalist with spiritual sciences, as paractitioners and aspiring adepts of awo(mystery) are taught/trained to be, and you are a Biblical literalist. Our ancestors made SPEPERATE historical records from their spiritual sciences(nature allegories) where they deamed it necessary, particularly in the case of KMT, where there is an over abundance. There is no need to make a nature allegory serve a purpose it was not meant to, unless a people had to 'invent' history.


You're right we won't have a meeting of the minds as long as you keep outright avoiding the real questions and injecting your own red herrings in an attempt to redirect the discussion to your own personal comfort zone. I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed? For this to be true that would mean that the Hebrews were capable of keeping their OWN historic records independent of Egyptian myth...and to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.


P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased. As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended... that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?
quote:
who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased


By who, pray tell? Not that I'm defending the dude, for I think his works speak for itself. I'm merely curious as to whom, you say, are making the claim.

Are they:

Ecclesiastics?

Biblical scholars?

Theologens?

...Or something to that affect?

If so, then yeah, one can see and overstand how they (not all) would regard is works as bias.

Especially when he is describing, that much of what makes up xianity (even hebrew faiths) is a new telling of old fables/myths with somewhat of a facelift.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
You're right we won't have a meeting of the minds as long as you keep outright avoiding the real questions and injecting your own red herrings in an attempt to redirect the discussion to your own personal comfort zone. I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed? For this to be true that would mean that the Hebrews were capable of keeping their OWN historic records independent of Egyptian myth...and to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.

P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased. As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended... that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?


thanks

YOU ARE THE BEST!

Very Nice...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Paying Attention!"
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
In this instance your use of the term 'Akhenaten's wife' is pertinent because you are making a specific claim with regard to her identity. You are claiming that she is "Asiatic" so that being the case it's important to know who she is so that this claim can be verified. The point is, a historical figure as widely know as Nefertiti should be referred to by name... True she was indeed "his wife" but it makes no sense whatsoever to refer to Nefertiti (who is arguably more widely known than even Akhenaten himself) as simply "his wife" most Blacks have heard of her (They also identify her as BLACK) but not everybody knows she was Akhenatens wife. So the way I see it there are only two reason why you would not properly identify her... A) You really did not know Akhenatens wife was Nefertiti despite the fact that you had heard of her. Or B) You were aware that Nefertiti was Akhenatens wife...but you knew if you called her by name your claim that she was "Asiatic" would have been obviously false and everyone could see that...so you chose the more covert designation "Akhenaten's wife" instead.


Sorry buddy, no dice, Like I said the proof is in the 'search option' pudding. If I didn't know who Akhenaten's wife was I wouldn't have been able to post about the subject and THEM BOTH a myriad of times on this board. SO cut the bs. If you do that search(that you are so fond of when attempting to prove your point) You would also see that I mentioned she was an Asiatic before on other threads. SO please stop nit picking on a non-issue. Unless of course youare willing you concede that your use of Isis, Osiris, and Horus is far more convincing evidence that you are unfamiliar with the African communities prefferred usage of KMTic version of the Neters... Which is far mor convincing considering you do not have a postig history that shows any different... where as I do.

quote:
This isn't even the main point though,


No kidding... Really? Roll Eyes

quote:
the real issue is how you keep avoiding the FACT that it was Akhenaten (not some "foreign invaders" as you keep claiming) who started monotheism in Africa. No amount of you blaming the Hyksos or you trying to throw Nefertiti under the chariot as being "Asiatic" is going to change that.


I guess you are not familiar with the terms I have always used on this and the previous thread... Asiatic INFLUENCE.

Remember, YOU were the one saying there were no Asians present that early on in KMT. All I was doing is showing that there were. Which is FACT.

quote:
I don't know why you are even trying to pull such a stunt it's only making you look bad and everyone can see it... so you really need to stop and just come clean.


Come clean about what? The flow of the conversation is all there for everyone to read in the previous thread that this thread developed from... Which you curiously haven't linked, although I requested you to because I couldn't remember the title. Is it exposing something which makes you uncomfortable? You sure pulled up a non-relevant link on an entirely different subject with a quickness just to go back and forth with Heru... Strange.

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
We will never have a meeting of the minds on this subject because I am a general non-literalist with spiritual sciences, as paractitioners and aspiring adepts of awo(mystery) are taught/trained to be, and you are a Biblical literalist. Our ancestors made SPEPERATE historical records from their spiritual sciences(nature allegories) where they deamed it necessary, particularly in the case of KMT, where there is an over abundance. There is no need to make a nature allegory serve a purpose it was not meant to, unless a people had to 'invent' history.


You're right we won't have a meeting of the minds as long as you keep outright avoiding the real questions and injecting your own red herrings in an attempt to redirect the discussion to your own personal comfort zone.


I've answered all your questions, so you can cut the bs now.

quote:
I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...


Please explain the mystical method of divination you use to 'separate' these supposedly 'already separate' historical records form the Helio Biblio Hybrid...

And also please explain why the supposed 'literal history' that you keep referring to in the Helio Biblio is based on previous cultures natural allegory(myth)... NOT their SEPARATE historical records.

You mentioned before, when there is not extra-Biblical evidence available, you just 'believe'. That doesn't cut it. Particularly since precicly where there is no extra-Biblical evidence for it literal history, are coincidentally the same instances where there is extra and pre-Biblical evidence showing that those supposed 'records' are a retelling of earlier cultures myths(not historical records). There is also extra-Biblical evidence that many of the 'mythical stories' in the Bible are based on previous cultures historical records as well... Oh what a tangled web a literary hybrid weaves.

That is a HUGE contradiction, that you cannot get around... Yet you just keep ignoring it.

quote:
the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed?


You comprehension must be low. I've stated OVER AND OVER that where extra-Biblical evidence is found, then historocity is accepted. There are HUGE amounts of extra-Biblical confirmation of Sheba historically existing(as you well know)... But the far earlier stores in the Helio Biblio that you are historizing and literalizing have NO extra-Biblical confirmation to take literally, and in fact, have been shown to be based on earlier cultures MYTHS(nature allegories), not their historical records, so the extra-Biblical info points to their NOT being literal. Get it?

quote:
For this to be true that would mean that the Hebrews were capable of keeping their OWN historic records independent of Egyptian myth...and to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.


Like I requested. Please explain what method of divination that you use to separate the NON SEPARATE stories you believe to be historical from the myths, without implementing the use of extra-biblical evidence. I'll be awaiting your reply.

quote:
P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here


Lol... Yes, a portion of my suggested reading list(on religion, there is a political one too) I provided someone with awhile back, and therefore keep in my yahoo for easy access, because I've been asked to provide it more than once by different people... I don't think it is enormous whatsoever... It's only 50-some-odd books. That isn't enough to fill a bookshelf. Confused

quote:
that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased.


Where did you get that from? You do realize Gerald Massey is featured on Africawithin... You know, that same site you pulled a quote from Dr. Ben from on the earlier thread? Were you aware that Black Classic Press had to republish his works because the mainstream wouldn't? I find it odd when people criticize authors they obviously haven't read a lick of. By the way, he lived from 1828-1907 so who wasn't a 'self taught' Egyptologist at that point? Are you saying you would agree with his conclusions if they sprung from the Euro-dominated field of that erra(who highly dissagreed with him)? Yes, I found a VERY SMALL amount of things that were offputting)not P.C.) in his words... but considering the time and his race, that was to be expected, just like it would be for Higgins and Anacalypsis. You do realize when he mentions the 'gorilla skull' it was in a passage where he was arguing Africa as the birthplace of humanity right? Even Garvey had a disparaging view of continental Africans(that disturbed me when I read it), and he was also a poet. Neither fact dismiss everything else the man wrote about. How about this, Read him and get back to me... Cuz your opinion of an unread author means ABSOLUTELY nothing.

quote:
As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended...


Skipped right passed the ones you left off your list which are considered his best works eh? Don't be so obvious next time... I said 'ALL' for a reason, you left off some VERY IMPORTANT works, or didn't you notice that.

quote:
that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?


Keep reading sweety... Like I said. We will never agree... So there is NO NEED to keep going back and forth when it isn't productive.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
You're right we won't have a meeting of the minds as long as you keep outright avoiding the real questions and injecting your own red herrings in an attempt to redirect the discussion to your own personal comfort zone. I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed? For this to be true that would mean that the Hebrews were capable of keeping their OWN historic records independent of Egyptian myth...and to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.

P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased. As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended... that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?


thanks

YOU ARE THE BEST!

Very Nice...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Paying Attention!"



Eek Uh oh, it's a bad sign when X-ian literalists start cheerleading... lol
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:


You really need a kid...or a man...and since Jesus won't do, why don't you grab another who believes like you and get something started...but dang girl, get some of that aggression out of you. Panties all in a bunch...get a husband and get rid of them.

LOL...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Laughing!"
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:


You really need a kid...or a man...and since Jesus won't do, why don't you grab another who believes like you and get something started...but dang girl, get some of that aggression out of you. Panties all in a bunch...get a husband and get rid of them.

LOL...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Laughing!"


Wow, internalized much sexist rhetoric lately Shaya? Not very 'positive' for a 'wise woman' to do.... Just because a womb-man is passionate about a or many subjects and doesn't enjoy Tyler Perry minstrelsy, doesn't mean their love life is lacking whatsoever. And I WILL NOT have children outside of wedlock, period. I don't think that is cute whatsoever. You need to quit hating about my internet flirting/joking with HB(whom I consider a friend) and bringing up passive aggressive reference to it on every thread. If you don't have an actual scholarly critique, or a 'positive' contribution to the subject, why don't you 'move on' to something positive?...As you always claim to do. Just a suggestion of course. You are free to keep up the 'negative' personal attacks, although that wouldn't be display of pathological positivity or a demonstration of 'wisdom'... You are also free to keep up the empty cheerleading. I by no means am telling your grown ass what to do. I wouldn't want to bite your style.. Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Wow, internalized much sexist rhetoric lately Shaya?


Umm...nah, not much.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Dreaming:
Just because a womb-man is passionate about a or many subjects and doesn't enjoy Tyler Perry minstrelsy, doesn't mean their love life is lacking whatsoever.


OK, Good...I'm glad you think so; it won't be hard for you to get positive, stop complaining and find a man anytime soon then. LOL..

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's So Delusional:
You need to quit hating about my internet flirting/joking with HB(whom I consider a friend) and bringing up reference to it on every thread.


I'm not "hating" on anything, I haven't said a word about HB and I don't bring reference to any "flirting" you think you are doing either. I don't know where you got that delusion, but it certainly didn't come from me, so don't go trying to create further divisions.

quote:
Originally posted by OH She's Hyped Up On Book Smarts:
If you don't have an actual scholarly critique, or a 'positive' contribution to the subject. Why don't you 'move on' to something positive?...Aas you always claim to do with your passive aggressive self.


I'm not passive aggressive: I just outright told you to get a life. MoreOver, because I actually have a life, there's no need to always give a scholarly critique upon everything that comes out of my mouth: I live real life...real stories for real people.

quote:
Originally posted by OH DOESN'T SHE DO THIS SAME THING EVERY DAY ALL DAY TO PEOPLE SHE DOESN'T AGREE WITH???:
Just a suggestion of course. You are free to keep up the 'negative' personal attacks, although that wouldn't be display of pathological positivity or a demonstration of wisdom... You are also free to keep up the empty cheerleading. I by no means am telling you what to do.


Really? Wow...I would have thought responding to the thread telling me how positive I should be and how I shouldn't "hate" on you, blah, blah, blah...was telling me what to do.

Now tell me this: How was my cheerleading LieDecrypter any different than the cheerleading you've done with others regarding some of my posts? Seems to me what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Doesn't feel too good does it?

MoreOver, I thought you hated 'suggestions' Oshun...I guess it's my turn to rant that I, too, am sick of "People who give constant unsolicited advice all the dang time, to grown folks who obviously don't need it... Yet they simultaneously obviously don't have their own shit together. WTH is that? Are they talking outloud 'at people' while internally they are trying to convince themselves? That looks really stupid, and is annoying as hell to constantly have to listen to, even if you are not their direct 'victim'."

Roll Eyes

"Wisdom Is A Woman Just Sayin!"
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-so-bossy:
OK, Good...I'm glad you think so; it won't be hard for you to get positive, stop complaining and find a man anytime soon then. LOL..


It sounds like you need to get one yourself dear. It seems to be preoccupying your thoughts in the religious section. BTW, passive aggressive posting ain't positive accept in your own mind. You ain't fooling anyone... Never have.

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-a-B:
I'm not "hating" on anything, I haven't said a word about HB and I don't bring reference to any "flirting" you think you are doing either. I don't know where you got that delusion, but it certainly didn't come from me, so don't go trying to create further divisions.


Well since you don't know me or my personal life, the only logical way you could ASS-ume I didn't have a man was if you were basing it on my recent flirtation... Remember, the same subject you brought up in a passive aggressive manner the last time you interacted with me UNPROVOKED on an unrelated thread/topic?

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-Board:I'm not passive aggressive:


tfro I noticed your behavior was passive aggressive when it was pointed out by another poster...

quote:
I just outright told you to get a life. MoreOver, because I actually have a life, there's no need to always give a scholarly critique upon everything that comes out of my mouth: I live real life...real stories for real people.


I guess that would explains your ability to dedicate time to consuming Tyler Perry minstrelsy... and constantly posting about telling others what they need to do. sck

quote:
Originally posted by She-has-no-depth:
Really? Wow...I would have thought responding to the thread telling me how positive I should be and how I shouldn't "hate" on you, blah, blah, blah...was telling me what to do.


Unprovoked criticism isn't appreciated when it's on the other foot I see. If you can't take it, don't dish it out dear. You asked for it.

quote:
Now tell me this: how was my cheerleading LieDecrypter any different than the cheerleading you've done with others regarding some of my posts? Seems to me what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Doesn't feel too good does it?


I never said it was different. I never complained about 'that' if you didn't notice. I just called it what it was.. cheerleading. When I actually responded about your post it was a warning to LD about the ideology of the person DOING the cheerleading. It was not an attempt on my part to directly interact with you. I avoid that like the plague.

quote:
MoreOver, I thought you hated 'suggestions' Oshun...I guess it's my turn to rant that [b]I, too, am sick of "People who give constant unsolicited advice all the dang time, to grown folks who obviously don't need it... Yet they simultaneously obviously don't have their own shit together. WTH is that? Are they talking outloud 'at people' while internally they are trying to convince themselves? That looks really stupid, and is annoying as hell to constantly have to listen to, even if you are not their direct 'victim'."

Roll Eyes

"Wisdom Is A Woman a woman Just Sayin!"


It sucks when what you put out in the universe comes back at you huh? I'm a staunch believer in do unto others as they do unto you. It's the only way most people 'get it'.

"Wisdom isn't a Woman who ALWAYS feels the need to be Just Sayin!"
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
It sounds like you need to get one yourself dear. It seems to be preoccupying your thoughts in the religious section. BTW, passive aggressive posting ain't positive accept in your own mind. You ain't fooling anyone... Never have.


Darlin, I'm happy being single...and I'm not the one being pissy up in here. That'd be you.

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-a-B:
Well since you don't know me or my personal life, the only logical way you could ASS-ume I didn't have a man was if you were basing it on my recent flirtation... Remember, the same subject you brought up in a passive aggressive manner the last time you interacted with me UNPROVOKED on an unrelated thread/topic?


Keep telling yourself that if that is what will help you sleep at night. Seems to me that "flirting" is preoccupying you, not me. But show your A$$umptions, by all means: my being a "B" in your book as you called it isn't the worst thing in the world I could be.

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-Board:
tfro I noticed your behavior was passive aggressive when it was pointed out by another poster... You are.


Thank you for verifying the fact that some of you engage in high school games. Another poster "told you so"??? How original! Way to pass the buck, BTW!

Yes, I'm bored: with that tired game.

quote:
I guess that would explains your ability to dedicate time to consuming Tyler Perry minstrelsy... and constantly posting about telling others what they need to do. sck


I like Tyler Perry: So what? Does this STILL mean that I need to dedicate EVERYTHING I do to scholarly pursuit? I mean dang, Oh She Needs To Do Something With HerSelf Besides Quote Books, there IS a whole entire life AFTER college essays! Get A Clue!

quote:
Originally posted by She-has-no-depth:Unprovoked criticism isn't appreciated when it's on the other foot I see. If you can't take it, don't dish it out dear. You asked for it.


No Depth??? On the other foot??? Oh LOOK WHO's TALKIN! Oshun, you AIN'T RIGHT. Now how MANY of my posts have you GONE OUT OF YOUR WAY to criticize or 'cheerlead' against and how many times have I ignored your tired insults?...and yes I said it, "TIRED"... Even when I've agreed with you, you've found SOMETHING to argue about. Don't give me any of that "giving it back to you" mess either, given that you seem to do a lot of the "starting" of it to begin with....and I ain't the only poster you've done this with as quiet as it's kept up in here.

quote:
I never said it was different. I could have sworn when I actually responded to your post it was a warning to LD, not to directly interact with you, which I avoid like the plague.


Oh, that's real juvenile: "Don't talk to her! She has cooties!" Again, grade school games. What ever happened to letting "grown folks" decide how they may? And if you strive to avoid me like the plague, why did you even respond? If you need to use the "ig" button to achieve this goal, then by all means: do so.

But I really think you really need to step up your game and join the world of real adults...I have no problem having conversation with you that seeks to build us up. I have yet to use the "ig" feature on anyone in here. But I'm not going to condone you tearing me or my ideas down all day either...and I know you can find a way to NOT do that.

quote:
It sucks when what you put out in the universe comes back at you huh? I'm a staunch believer in do unto others as they do unto you. It's the only way most people 'get it'.


You are so right - and this is why I get why you have so many problems with Christians, or X-ians, as you say. It is also the reason why I UnderStand how you sit in a forum and post all day long....you ain't got jack else to do. While I am grateful to be able to post in here when I can, I am so glad that I don't have THAT much time to burn! Thank GOD for real life!

So what REALLY sucks, Oshun, is the fact that while I ReSpect your mind and your ability to find and dole out information to OUR people, I've lost ReSpect for you as a person because you don't use your being to fully bring any knowledge into its full existence; instead, you seek to insult, tear down and perform in the very minstrel shows you claim you hate - and THAT to me is why Our People will lose every time.

"Wisdom Is A Woman Wondering When You Will Try To Get It Right!"
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
Darlin, I'm happy being single...and I'm not the one being pissy up in here. That'd be you.


So stop giving advice on finding a man. And when I'm pissed off I'm pissy. Your point?

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-a-B:Keep telling yourself that if that is what will help you sleep at night. Seems to me that "flirting" is preoccupying you, not me. But show your A$$umptions, by all means: my being a "B" in your book as you called it isn't the worst thing in the world I could be.


Once again, your point?

quote:
Originally posted by She's-really-Bored:
Thank you for verifying the fact that some of you engage in high school games. Another poster "told you so"??? How original! Way to pass the buck, BTW!


He observed your behavior and diagnosed it properly. That's isn't a game.

quote:
Yes, I'm bored: with that tired game.


Denial.

quote:
I like Tyler Perry: So what?


Garbage in garbage out.

quote:
Does this STILL mean that I need to dedicate EVERYTHING I do to scholarly pursuit?


Nope, but minstrelsy has symbolic effects on one's worldview far beyond 'entertainment', and takes up time that could be used for other pursuits, including positive entertainment.

quote:
I mean dang, Oh She Needs To Do Something With HerSelf Besides Quote Books, there IS a whole entire life AFTER college essays! Get A Clue!

I often hear that from people who never pick up a book after formal education. Some people actually ENJOY non-fiction books and discussing the info contained in them. Why would I discuss other interests in the religious/spiritual section of a message board, let alone on this thread?

quote:
Originally posted by She-has-no-depth:
No Depth??? On the other foot??? Oh LOOK WHO's TALKIN! [b]Oshun, you AIN'T RIGHT.
Now how MANY of my posts have you GONE OUT OF YOUR WAY to criticize or 'cheerlead' against and how many times have I ignored your tired insults?...


Cheerleading isn't insulting... As I stated I had no problem with agreeing with posters. i do it all the time.

quote:
...and yes I said it, "TIRED"... Even when I've agreed with you, you've found SOMETHING to argue about. Don't give me any of that "giving it back to you" mess either, given that you seem to do a lot of the "starting" of it to begin with....and I ain't the only poster you've done this with as quiet as it's kept up in here.


I'm glad my posts are 'tired' to the likes of you, we have very different likes/dislikes. BTW, check your posts, u are usually the 'last word' princess.

quote:
I never said it was different. I could have sworn when I actually responded to your post it was a warning to LD, not to directly interact with you, which I avoid like the plague.


Oh, that's real juvenile: "Don't talk to her! She has cooties!" Again, grade school games.
What ever happened to letting "grown folks" decide how they may? And if you strive to avoid me like the plague, why did you even respond? If you need to use the "ig" button to achieve this goal, then by all means: do so.



Uhmmm no, you missed my edit...

quote:
When I actually responded about your post it was a warning to LD about the ideology of the person DOING the cheerleading. It was not an attempt on my part to directly interact with you. I avoid that like the plague.


He does not agree with X-ian literalism, or X-ianity whatsoever. It wasn't about 'don't talk to her', 'it wsas exactly what I stated. "Uh oh, it's a bad sign when X-ian literalists start cheerleading..."

I can and do respond to whomever I want, when I want. Even folks I don't particualrly like and/or agree with. I don't use the ignore function with anyone. It just ain't me to sensure people, even from myself. It's a public board. I just AVOID initial interaction with you, which the focus of my post substantiates.

quote:
But I really think you really need to step up your game and join the world of real adults...I have no problem having conversation with you that seeks to build us up. I have yet to use the "ig" feature on anyone in here. But I'm not going to condone you tearing me or my ideas down all day either...and I know you can find a way to NOT do that.


The world of real adults I deal with don't tell people who are interested in books to get a life by having a baby out of wedlock or 'getting a man' because they do not share the same interests. ... I just don't agree with your religious ideology or share your general interests. An adult would not interpret that as 'tearing them down'... But I can talk shit with and to the best of them whne someone gets the ball rolling.

quote:
You are so right - and this is why I get why you have so many problems with Christians, or X-ians, as you say. It is also the reason why I UnderStand how you sit in a forum and post all day long....you ain't got jack else to do. While I am grateful to be able to post in here when I can, I am so glad that I don't have THAT much time to burn! Thank GOD for real life!


Lol... all day? Ok... Roll Eyes

quote:
So what REALLY sucks, Oshun, is the fact that while I ReSpect your mind and your ability to find and dole out information to OUR people, I've lost ReSpect for you as a person because you don't use your being to fully bring any knowledge into its full existence; instead, you seek to insult, tear down and perform in the very minstrel shows you claim you hate - and THAT to me is why Our People will lose every time.

"Wisdom Is A Woman Wondering When You Will Try To Get It Right!"


This from someone who goes out of their way with passive aggressive insults when someone isn't even talking to them. BTW, I haven't had much respect for your posting style(or interests) for a LONG time, so no loss...

Now, back to the subject...
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
So stop giving advice on finding a man. And when I'm pissed off I'm pissy. Your point?


Deal with your pissiness, rather than take it out on members of the board...and if you'd excercise common sense, you would have got that after the first post.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
He observed your behavior and diagnosed it properly. That's isn't a game....


LOL...so classic. He 'diagnosed' it? You are so full of it, it ain't even funny. But hide behind others if you must.

quote:
Denial.


Yes, you are in it. That's MY diagnosis.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I often hear that from people who never pick up a book after formal education. Some people actually ENJOY non-fiction books and discussing the info contained in them. Why would I discuss other interests in the religious/spiritual section of a message board, let alone on this thread?


Well you aren't dealing with that over here...and believe it or not some of us can see right through you. Your issues with Religion need to be taken up with a counselor...I can't help it if you don't like Jesus/God. If you are pissed at them, do something about it. But messing with Christians all day and then whining about how "pushy" and deluded they are ain't going to help you any time soon.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Cheerleading isn't insulting... As I stated I had no problem with agreeing with posters. i do it all the time.


Let's not play games, as I believe you know what you are doing. Cheerleading is insulting when you seek to do it as a means to make others look bad...thinking you are making yourself look superior. But as you said, you "do it all the time" so maybe you've become desensitized to the fact that you look like a stuck up priss when you keep messing with people.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I'm glad my posts are 'tired' to the likes of you, we have very different likes/dislikes. BTW, check your posts, u are usually the 'last word' princess.


Wow...for you to "recognize" whether or not I have the last word or not says a lot about what you do with your time...and how "the likes of" me affect you.

But whatever: I don't need to have the last word on everything.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Uhmmm no, you missed my edit...


Ummm...no I didn't. Juvenile is juvenile. Stop hatin...everybody can share the spotlight. Your jealousy is unbecoming. You have issues with other strong Women sharing the spotlight. So get off of your high horse and just deal with it.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
He does not agree with X-ian literalism, or X-ianity whatsoever. It wasn't about 'don't talk to her', 'it wsas exactly what I stated. "Uh oh, it's a bad sign when X-ian literalists start cheerleading..."


I never said that he did, but I do agree with him on the fact that your "disdain" for some things have led you down a horribly negative path and it stinks all over the place. In addition, I agree with the fact that if you are going to suggest books, KNOW what those books are saying in their entirety before you take up the claim that they support your argument fully.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I can and do respond to whomever I want, when I want. Even folks I don't particualrly like and/or agree with. I don't use the ignore function with anyone. It just ain't me to sensure people, even from myself. It's a public board. I just AVOID initial interaction with you, which the focus of my post substantiates.


Yes, we see that...but I'm not dying over here if you avoid interaction with me. Do what you gotta do. No sweat off of my back....for real!

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The world of real adults I deal with don't tell people who are interested in books to get a life by having a baby out of wedlock or 'getting a man' because they do not share the same interests. ... I just don't agree with your religious ideology or share your general interests. An adult would not interpret that as 'tearing them down'... But I can talk shit with and to the best of them whne someone gets the ball rolling.


Who needs to go back and read? I told you to get a husband and do what you gotta do. I never told you to have a child out of wedlock.

MoreOver, you are not dealing in Adult themes at all. Back biting and yes, as you say "talk shit", yes...that is you and for you to sit and call it anything else is nothing but a lie.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
This from someone who goes out of their way with passive aggressive insults when someone isn't even talking to them. BTW, I haven't had much respect for your posting style(or interests) for a LONG time, so no loss...


Again, I didn't give you any passive aggressive insults. I brought it to you direct. If you are feeling insecure about something, you need to deal with that. MoreOver, I find it remarkably funny how you can dish out mess all day under the guise of "intellectual discussion", but look out if anybody dares smack it back on you. It is horribly unattractive that you can't see how you post crap behind other posters all of the time, but that isn't "passive aggressive?" I don't need to "sugar coat" anything for you Oshun, and people generally know that I don't hold my tongue.

As far as you caring for my posting style or interests, I could care less. Jokers usually don't hold my interest long. I've exercised great restraint when dealing with you on this forum...and today, I'm putting my foot down.

Just because I am trying to live a PEACEful life does not mean that I have to put up with every nonsensical thing you have on offer.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Now, back to the subject...


Yes, and that was that your argument was weak, your attitude sucks, and you've been "full of it" for a very long time. When you have something positive to say about issues and can talk to me on your own without referencing 10 different articles or books and insulting the "hell" out of me, get at me.

Until then, shut that "hell" up!

"Wisdom Is A Woman Fed Up!"
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:


You really need a kid...or a man...and since Jesus won't do, why don't you grab another who believes like you and get something started...but dang girl, get some of that aggression out of you. Panties all in a bunch...get a husband and get rid of them.

LOL...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Laughing!"






WAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
Deal with your pissiness, rather than take it out on members of the board...and if you'd excercise common sense, you would have got that after the first post.


I'm dealing with the preson who pissed me off, just like YOU ARE... Remember, you said I'm not the only 'pissy' one.. meaning you know whatyou are being. BTW, it's time you let it sink in that you cannot tell grown folks what to do.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
LOL...so classic. He 'diagnosed' it? You are so full of it, it ain't even funny. But hide behind others if you must.


Mre denial...

quote:
Yes, you are in it. That's MY diagnosis.


Ok... not sure about what...

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Well you aren't dealing with that over here...and believe it or not some of us can see right through you. Your issues with Religion need to be taken up with a counselor...I can't help it if you don't like Jesus/God. If you are pissed at them, do something about it. But messing with Christians all day and then whining about how "pushy" and deluded they are ain't going to help you any time soon.


WTF are you talking about? LD ain't X-ian genius. I take no issue with the a 'Sun allegory'. I take issue with literalist exclusivist Judeo-X-ian-Islamity and what it has perpetuated against the indigenous people's of the planet. Funny how you stick your head in the sand about that, but think my reacting to it's genocidal and culturally imperialist effects are 'a' or 'the' problem.... Concentrating on little old me while simultaneously accepting the ideology of 2000+ years of empire and physical and cultural genocide in the name of Jesus... Talk about having your priorities backwards...

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Let's not play games, as I believe you know what you are doing. Cheerleading is insulting when you seek to do it as a means to make others look bad...thinking you are making yourself look superior. But as you said, you "do it all the time" so maybe you've become desensitized to the fact that you look like a stuck up priss when you keep messing with people.


Oh, ok. So that is what you were doing by cheerleading on here? I thought you were just agreeing with LD plain and simple. Outside of this now 2nd long winded confrontation in the religious section(last time because you called traditional African possesion 'of the devil'), I rarely if ever direct ANYTHING in your direction, so I'm not sure what 'cheerleading' you could be refferring to that I've done to mess with you. I barely speak to you online.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Wow...for you to "recognize" whether or not I have the last word or not says a lot about what you do with your time...and how "the likes of" me affect you.

But whatever: I don't need to have the last word on everything.


You mean skimming before I decide to post on a thread? I'm a voracious reader, that doesn't take a wole lot of effort or time to see back and forths and who posts last. Must have struck a nerve.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Ummm...no I didn't. Juvenile is juvenile. Stop hatin...everybody can share the spotlight. Your jealousy is unbecoming. You have issues with other strong Women sharing the spotlight. So get off of your high horse and just deal with it.


lol Are you serious? You haven't even contributed to the subject. What would I be 'hatin on', jealous of, or in need of dealing with? Shit talking? Self-righteousness posing as positivity? I don't even know you, and I don't presume to know peoples lives via the net(unlike you). PLEASE share the 'spotlight'(whatever that is on a messageboard} and contribute to the subject of discussion. It would be a refreshing change.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I never said that he did, but I do agree with him on the fact that your "disdain" for some things have led you down a horribly negative path and it stinks all over the place.


So you were cheerleading(via your definition, not mine). Negativity towards religious imperialism, and those who pretend it doesn't/isn't happenning... Yup that's me! Cuz once that's done you are part of the problem. IMO Semetic apologists and those who stick their head in the sand in the name of psuedo-positivity, yet have no problem criticising individuals they don't agree with 'to death' have a particularly horrible stench.

quote:
In addition, I agree with the fact that if you are going to suggest books, KNOW what those books are saying in their entirety before you take up the claim that they support your argument fully.


I don't know about you, but I rarely if ever 100% agree with any authors all the time, including almost all of those I mentioned; hence I read MANY sources. That doesn not mean I cannot glean certain pertinant information from each and every one of them. The student takes what's usefull from the teacher. The combination of the information from the MANY sources that I listed is what supports my argument. If you take one single book out and try to use only that source, you would be dealing with only a fragment of the entire picture. Which is part of my argument. LD is only dealing with one fragment, hence he's stuck in literalism. Now since you seem to be insinuating you have read the list... or even his list. Why are you X-ian? Cuz his list alone kinda would lead one not to be. If you haven't read any of either lists... than you weren't just cheerleading... but blindly doing so. Which wouldn't suprise me considering the source.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Yes, we see that...but I'm not dying over here if you avoid interaction with me. Do what you gotta do. No sweat off of my back....for real!


Ditto. So stop expecting me not to repond because you want to apply your last-word-ism and interject more passive aggressive insults without confrontation.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Who needs to go back and read?


You do...

quote:
I told you to get a husband and do what you gotta do. I never told you to have a child out of wedlock.


Nah you said, "You really need a kid...or a man..."

Wrong order honey, you were presupposing I didn't have a man, and mentioned the suggestion to have a 'kid' first, which is telling me to have one out of wedlock. And having a 'man' isn't the same thing as being married or having a husband, which is supposed to come frist, and therefore be suggested FIRST. If that's the shitty ass irrelevent message one intends to be sending.

quote:
MoreOver, you are not dealing in Adult themes at all. Back biting and yes, as you say "talk shit", yes...that is you and for you to sit and call it anything else is nothing but a lie.


You are biting right on back honey. Yet complaining about 'adult themes'. Still waiting for you to add to the actual subject... Which would be the adult thing to do. Isn't this the second thread that you have recently posted in without dealing with the subject? Not very adult....

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Again, I didn't give you any passive aggressive insults. I brought it to you direct. If you are feeling insecure about something, you need to deal with that. MoreOver, I find it remarkably funny how you can dish out mess all day under the guise of "intellectual discussion", but look out if anybody dares smack it back on you.


LD has been talking shit to me the whole thread. But he stays with the thread TOPIC an adds to it the discussion. ALL you want to do is talk shit without NAY discussion of the subject. Obviously I'm 'taking it', but I ain't letting it slide unaddressed either.

quote:
It is horribly unattractive that you can't see how you post crap behind other posters all of the time, but that isn't "passive aggressive?" I don't need to "sugar coat" anything for you Oshun, and people generally know that I don't hold my tongue.


Girl please. You got called out on your self-righteous, 'tell other folks what to do' passive agressiveness on two threads already. You actually STARTED a thread to do just that not too long ago, and got called on it.

quote:
As far as you caring for my posting style or interests, I could care less. Jokers usually don't hold my interest long. I've exercised great restraint when dealing with you on this forum...and today, I'm putting my foot down.


Are you serious? What you gonna do? Spank me? As I've said, we barely interact on this site... So you haven't been 'restraining yourself' from non-existant conversations. We could careless about each others opinions or interests because we don't have similar ones... I was REMINDING you that it's a two way street.

quote:
Just because I am trying to live a PEACEful life does not mean that I have to put up with every nonsensical thing you have on offer.


Roll Eyes I ain't asking you to put up with anything. You are free to disengage, but if you talk ish, you will get a response.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Yes, and that was that your argument was weak, your attitude sucks, and you've been "full of it" for a very long time. When you have something positive to say about issues and can talk to me on your own without referencing 10 different articles or books and insulting the "hell" out of me, get at me.


Sorry. I don't 'dumb it down'. Especially to engage you, Im already familiar with your ideology and chosen limitations.

quote:
Until then, shut that "hell" up!


Sure won't.

quote:
"Wisdom Is A Woman Fed Up!"


It's just the internet... Roll Eyes I suggest being 'fed up' with global issues instead of focussing on individuals who irk you... Yet can't do a dman thing to you. Nor you to them

Now, back to the subject!
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Oh She Just Don't Know When To Shut Up:
I am dealing with it, I'm dealing with the preson who pissed me off, just like YOU ARE... Remember, you said I'm not the opnly 'pissy' one.. meaning you know waht you are being. BTW, stop telling me what to do.....


Long rant...not surprising...yada, yada, yada...

NEXT!

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Playing Stupid Now:
WTF are you talking about? LD ain't X-ian genius. I take no issue with the myth of Yeshua, I do take issue with literalist exclusivist Judeo-X-ian-Islamity and what it has perpetrated against the indigenous people's of the planet. Funny how you you stick your head in the sand about that but think my reacting to it's genocidal and culturally imperialist effects are 'a' or 'the' problem.... Concentrating on Little old me while simultaneously accepting the ideology of 2000+ years of empire and physical and cultural genocide in the name of Jesus... Talk about having your priorities backwards...


I've got MY head in the sand and concentrating on you, yet you are the one always arguing with Christians about what Christians decide to believe....

oooooookkkkkkkkkkaaaaaaayyyyyyyy

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Got Selective Memory Now:
Oh ok, So that is what you were doing by cheerleading on here? I thought you were just agreeing with LD plain and simple........I rarely if ever direct ANYTHING in your direction, so I'm not sure what 'cheerleading' you could be refferring to that I've done to mess with you. I barely speak to you online.


That's right...I forget: You talk out the side of your neck to me with others and pretend you didn't do anything, but my bad!

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Not So Thorough:
You mean skimming before I decide to post on a thread? I'm a voracious reader, that doesn't take a wole lot of effort or time to see back and forths and who posts last. Must have struck a nerve.


CORRECTION: You're a voracious "Bull shitter"...and the only thing you keep striking is the bull pucky you keep throwin up in here.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Falling Apart:
lol Are you serious? You haven't even contributed to the subject. What would I be jealous of or in need of dealing with? Shit talking? Self-righteousness posing as positivity? PLEASE share the 'spotlight'(whatever that is on a messageboard' and contribute to the subject of discussion. It would be a refreshing change.


COMPLETELY SERIOUS. BUT HEY: IT IS WHAT IT IS.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Name Calling Again:
So you were cheerleading(via your definition not mine)Negativity towards religious imperialism... Yup that's me! IMO Smetic apologists and those who stick their head in the sand in the name of psuedo-positivity, yet have no problem criticising individuals they dont agree with 'to death' have a particularly horrible stench.


Semetic Apologist....Awww come on, Oshun, is that the best you can do? Oh, wait a minute...I'll brb....have to grab my Secret: wouldn't want to offend you.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Explaining Why She Keeps Complaining:
I don't know about you, but I rarely 100% agree with any author all the time, including almost all of those I mentioned, hence I read MANY sources. That doesn not mean I cannot glean certain pertinant information from each and every one of them. The student takes what's usefull from the teacher. The combination of the information from the MANY sources that I listed is what supports my argument. If you take one single book out and try to use only that source, you would be dealing with only a fragment of the entire picture. Which is part of my argument. LD is only dealing with one fragment, hence he's stuck in literalism. Now since you seem to be insinuating you have read the list... or even his list. Why are you X-ian? Cuz his list alone kinda would lead one not to be. If you haven't read any of either lists... than you weren't just cheerleading... but blindly doing so. WHich wouldn't suprise me.


Now this is what really gets me: OSHUN, I POINTED OUT SOME OF THOSE SAME SOURCES TO YOU AND THE REST OF THE FORUM WHEN I PUT UP CERTAIN LINKS IN THE SPOT THAT MBM SO GRATIOUSLY GAVE ME ON THIS SITE....WHAT'S MORE, I TOLD YOU TO GO IN THERE AND GET THAT INFO FOR YOURSELF. The issue isn't the sources; it's what you DO with the sources.

Are you implying that just because I've read many of the books on the list, that I should agree with all of their premises? I've told you once before that I've been down the road you are traveling and the fact that I've CHOSEN to be a Christian after that and some other "spiritual offerings" should speak VOLUMES on what exists out here; upon what is possible...and how someone of that particular path would come to be Christian.

But in this I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I realize you haven't walked that path yet.

This is why I don't chastise you about NOT being Christian.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's At It Again:
Ditto. But don't try to tell me not to repond because you want to apply your last-word-ism and interject more passive aggressive insults without confrontation.


I've already stated that I don't need to have the last word...and this sheer exchange alone should tell you that I don't have a problem confronting you on an issue. The Passive Aggressive does not apply to me.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Choosing Not To Use Her Intellectual Ability Now:
Nah you said, "You really need a kid...or a man..."

Wrong order honey, you were presuposing I didn't have a man, and mentioned a 'kid' first, which is telling me to have one out of wedlock. And having a 'man' isn't the same thing as being married or having a husband, which is supposed to come, and therefore be suggested FIRST.


I can't help what you A$$umed, Oshun. By telling you that you needed a kid, I was saying just that; as having children puts a lot of "why's" into perspective...and really teaches you to learn to "chill out"...In no way does that imply that you need to get a kid "out of wedlock." When I ended that paragraph by clearly saying, "GO GET YOURSELF A HUSBAND...." it couldn't get any clearer what I meant; especially given that we know in order to get a kid, it's ideal to have a husband...and in order to have a man, I'd hope you'd want it to be a husband. But if you want to split horse hairs, that's on you.

So Again I ask, "WHO NEEDS TO GO BACK AND READ & THEN USE COMMON SENSE???"

So much for all of that enjoying scholarly pursuit!

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Surprised That Some Of Us Will Fight Back:
You are biting right on back honey....


Yes, I am...I don't like catty Women who keep being catty only because they feel they can....and I know you can do better than that when you deal with me, because I'm not takin none any more.

....and I'm still waiting on you to contribute something besides Non-Christian rhetoric we've all heard a thousand times before and childish games.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's Not Happy Taking What She Dishes Out:
LD has been talking shit to me the whole thread. But at least he stays with the thread TOPIC an adds to it the discussion. ALL you want to do is talk shit without NAY discussion of the subject. Obviously I'm 'taking it', but I ain't letting it slide unaddressed either.


That's funny given that I had NOT said anything to YOU at all to begin with...as I recall, you were the one who came after me because I happened to be in agreement with LD. Now I don't remember stalking YOU each time you happened to be in disagreement with ME over an issue or everytime you thought it necessary to co-sign someone else's illness on this site either.

...and if you are being honest here, you will admit to participating in such acts on more than one occassion...but I won't hold my breath any time soon.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She Thinks She's Right Again:
Girl please. You got called out on your self-righteous, 'tell other folks what to do' passive agressiveness on two threads already. You actually STARTED a thread to do just that not to long ago, and got called on it.


I didn't get "called out" on anything. I suggested that people be more positive, given that some seem to put a lot of time and energy into being negative and generally wasting time....I can't help if others chose to argue about it, versus take the words to heart.

MoreOver, when others stand by what they believe in here, I don't hear it being called "self-righteous", yet when a Christian chooses to stand by what they believe, we seem to morph into all of these "ugly" things that people just can't seem to deal with anymore. What's really funny is that people make comments up in this set constantly, making suggestions on policy, on star's clothing and baby bumps (yes I saw it), on our role with Black Folk, yet when I happen to make a suggestion, it is conveniently labeled "telling others what to do"...again, some of you all are full of it....and what's worse: I know you realize this.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She Can't See Now: Are you serious? What you gonna do? Spank me?....(yada, yada, yada...)


I don't have to DO anything. You'll do it for me...that's the beautiful thing! Just keep going the way you're going and living in denial.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She's So Clueless: You are free to disengage, but if you talk ish, you will bet a response.


Ummmm....well if I actually talked ish I suppose that would be a concern of mine. But since you have that corner of the world mastered, I'll leave you to talk to yourself much like the dementia warrants for you anyway.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She Thinks She's Smart:
Sorry. I don't 'dumb it down'....


Really??? Wow...I thought your whole diatribe was a lesson in 'Dumb and Dumber'...

LOL....but you would know better than me right?

quote:
Originally Posted By Oh She Likes To Argue When I Told Her To Shut That 'HELL' Up:Sure won't.


I know you won't: that is the nature of ignorance.

"Wisdom Is A Woman Who Can Do This All Day, But Won't!"
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
Long rant...not surprising...yada, yada, yada...

NEXT!


Projection? sleep

quote:
That's right...I forget: You talk out the side of your neck to me with others and pretend you didn't do anything, but my bad!


No examples to provide eh? Must be because I barely speak to you.

quote:
CORRECTION: You're a voracious "Bull shitter"...and the only thing you keep striking is the bull pucky you keep throwin up in here.


You must enjoy rolling in shit then, cuz you can't seem to leave me alone... and deal with the subject at hand. Razz

quote:
COMPLETELY SERIOUS. BUT HEY: IT IS WHAT IT IS.


Seriously smoking something.

quote:
Semetic Apologist....Awww come on, Oshun, is that the best you can do? Oh, wait a minute...I'll brb....have to grab my Secret: wouldn't want to offend you.


Confused

quote:
Now this is what really gets me: OSHUN, I POINTED OUT SOME OF THOSE SAME SOURCES TO YOU AND THE REST OF THE FORUM WHEN I PUT UP CERTAIN LINKS IN THE SPOT THAT MBM SO GRATIOUSLY GAVE ME ON THIS SITE....


Sorry, I never read your section. Like I stated, I avoid you until you start directing posts towards me.

quote:
WHAT'S MORE, I TOLD YOU TO GO IN THERE AND GET THAT INFO FOR YOURSELF. The issue isn't the sources; it's what you DO with the sources.


Yeah, like ignore what's in them.

quote:
Are you implying that just because I've read many of the books on the list, that I should agree with all of their premises?


No, I'm SAYING that if you are still an X-ian literalist after finding out all the pre-X-ian asrotheological myths it is based on, then you are sticking your head in the sand.

quote:
I've told you once before that I've been down the road you are traveling


That's what you have claimed, but none of your posts in here have ever reflected even being EXPOSED to the info. And when asked about it, by other posters mind you, you clam up or start dancing.

quote:
...and the fact that I've CHOSEN to be a Christian... after that and some other "spiritual offerings" should speak VOLUMES on what exists out here; upon what is possible...and how someone of that particular path would come to be Christian.


No, it speaks volumes to the fact that you are sticking your head in the sand, but to each his/her own.

quote:
But in this I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I realize you haven't walked that path yet.


PLEASE!

quote:
This is why I don't chastise you about NOT being Christian.


lol Stop it, you are killing me!

quote:
I've already stated that I don't need to have the last word...and this sheer exchange alone should tell you that I don't have a problem confronting you on an issue. The Passive Aggressive does not apply to me.


Stating something about yourself doesn't make it factual. You have been passive aggressive in the past, and your initial post on this thread was, by your own admission/description of what your cheerleading was about.

quote:
So Again I ask, "WHO NEEDS TO GO BACK AND READ & THEN USE COMMON SENSE???"


You do, order means a lot in my book, especially in an irrelevant, shitty ass, ratish insult like that one.

quote:
Yes, I am...I don't like catty Women who keep being catty only because they feel they can....and I know you can do better than that when you deal with me, because I'm not takin none any more.


You brought the claws out with rat ass insult you attempted, just like you did with that passive aggressive ish in the pet peeves thread when nobody was addressing you or anything you said. So YOU need to start out better, and not sink so low if you want some kind of respect up in here.

quote:
....and I'm still waiting on you to contribute something besides Non-Christian rhetoric we've all heard a thousand times before and childish games.


You are so far off the subject of this thread you haven't even realized it isn't even about X-ianity!

quote:
That's funny given that I had NOT said anything to YOU at all to begin with...as I recall, you were the one who came after me because I happened to be in agreement with LD. Now I don't remember stalking YOU each time you happened to be in disagreement with ME over an issue or everytime you thought it necessary to co-sign someone else's illness on this site either.


You already admitted why you posted in agreement. No need to front now. And don't act like you just didn't recently come after me with that same 'man' centered insult in another thread. You ain't slick.

quote:
...and if you are being honest here, you will admit to participating in such acts on more than one occassion...but I won't hold my breath any time soon.


Like I said, I avoid you... We barely speak and you know it. We actually don't even post on the same threads that frequently, and when we do we usually are talking about extremely different things to different posters.

quote:
Originally posted by Oh She Thinks She's Right Again:I didn't get "called out" on anything. I suggested that people be more positive, given that some seem to put a lot of time and energy into being negative and generally wasting time....I can't help if others chose to argue about it, versus take the words to heart.


You must have ignored the responses to that thread...

quote:
MoreOver, when others stand by what they believe in here, I don't hear it being called "self-righteous", yet when a Christian chooses to stand by what they believe, we seem to morph into all of these "ugly" things that people just can't seem to deal with anymore. What's really funny is that people make comments up in this set constantly, making suggestions on policy, on star's clothing and baby bumps (yes I saw it), on our role with Black Folk, yet when I happen to make a suggestion, it is conveniently labeled "telling others what to do"...again, some of you all are full of it....and what's worse: I know you realize this.


You started A THREAD on telling POSTERS what to do... You entered another thread telling me to do the exact opposite of the thread subject. Your self-righteous attitude has absolutely nothing to do with your choice of religion IMO. It's your need to constantly give unwarranted and unrequested criticism and insults unrelated to the topic, and thinly veil them as 'advice' on being more positive. Like someone should listen and doesn't see the ish for what it is. It's annoying to say the least.

BTW, I can't tell the former Mrs. Simmons what to do if she ain't a poster... But I can comment on her outfit on a DISCUSSION BOARD. The fact that you would compare that to you telling POSTERS what to say and how to say it demonstrates a small disconnect with reality on your part.

quote:
I don't have to DO anything. [b]You'll do it for me...that's the beautiful thing! Just keep going the way you're going and living in denial.


Alrighty... whatever that means.

quote:
[Ummmm....well if I actually talked ish I suppose that would be a concern of mine. But since you have that corner of the world mastered, I'll leave you to talk to yourself much like the dementia warrants for you anyway.


Who posted the rat ass comment about 'get a man' in the spiritual/religious thread? That's talking major shit darling.

quote:
Really??? Wow...I thought your whole diatribe was a lesson in 'Dumb and Dumber'...

LOL....but you would know better than me right?


What an intellectual comeback.. I'm speechless... Roll Eyes

quote:
Originally Posted By Oh She Likes To Argue When I Told Her To Shut That 'HELL' Up:Sure won't.


I know you won't: that is the nature of ignorance.[/QUOTE]

No, that's the nature of grown ass women who doesn't have to do what you tell her to.

quote:
"Wisdom Is A Woman Who Can Do This All Day, But Won't!"


So if you continue, then by your own standards you aren't wise?

Then, back to the subject...
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:

Let's not play games, as I believe you know what you are doing. Cheerleading is insulting when you seek to do it as a means to make others look bad...thinking you are making yourself look superior. But as you said, you "do it all the time" so maybe you've become desensitized to the fact that you look like a stuck up priss when you keep messing with people.




BUSTED!! 20
quote:
Another slam dunk by ShayaButHer:

Again, I didn't give you any passive aggressive insults. I brought it to you direct. If you are feeling insecure about something, you need to deal with that. MoreOver, I find it remarkably funny how you can dish out mess all day under the guise of "intellectual discussion", but look out if anybody dares smack it back on you. It is horribly unattractive that you can't see how you post crap behind other posters all of the time, but that isn't "passive aggressive?" I don't need to "sugar coat" anything for you Oshun, and people generally know that I don't hold my tongue.





Busted AGAIN!!! lol
quote:
Originally posted by ShayaButHer:
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
You're right we won't have a meeting of the minds as long as you keep outright avoiding the real questions and injecting your own red herrings in an attempt to redirect the discussion to your own personal comfort zone. I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed? For this to be true that would mean that the Hebrews were capable of keeping their OWN historic records independent of Egyptian myth...and to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.

P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased. As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended... that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?


thanks

YOU ARE THE BEST!

Very Nice...

"Wisdom Is A Woman Paying Attention!"


You're welcome...I noticed that you made some nice points as well.
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor:
quote:
who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased


By who, pray tell? Not that I'm defending the dude, for I think his works speak for itself. I'm merely curious as to whom, you say, are making the claim.

Are they:

Ecclesiastics?

Biblical scholars?

Theologens?

...Or something to that affect?

If so, then yeah, one can see and overstand how they (not all) would regard is works as bias.

Especially when he is describing, that much of what makes up xianity (even hebrew faiths) is a new telling of old fables/myths with somewhat of a facelift.



Of course some of those groups you mentioned would say he was biased due to their own particular biases. Although, who I had in mind were neutral historians who don't have any particular slant either way but base their view on his work itself and his background as a practicing Druid . You are correct his work does speak for itself and personally I have credited his honesty in helping reveal the truth that Egypt was a Black civilization. However, that's where it stops with me and I have no other reason to associate with this man. His beliefs are rooted in European/Celtic Druidism/Paganism and the only reason he wrote books revealing the truth about Blacks in Egypt was to express his hatred for christianity...not because he had some kind of innate love or respect for Black folk (hence his comparing us to Gorilla's comment).

It's kind of like today with these ultra leftist/liberal whites who patronize Blacks... whenever they get miffed with THEIR system the first thing they do is run and hide behind the first Black person they can find in order to piss off the "establishment"... using them as pawns in their game. Or the classic example of how "Becky" is pissed off with her parents because they won't let her have her way on something so she gets with the Biggest and Blackest "Mandingo" she can find to get back at them. In this example the Black dude is just happy because he is "getting some" not understanding the power dynamics between "Becky" and her parents behind it. To me this is just like when Blacks start giving too much credit to Massey simply because he's admitting the truth about Egypt. They lose focus and get all giddy because a 'white man' is saying it so that gives it more credibility... So they swallow everything else he said hook line and sinker. Not even realizing that they have once again fell for the okey doke. So for me while I will give Massey a nod for his honesty about Egypt being Black I will not subscribe to his theosophical belief system (which can't be proven to be fact any more than any other religion can be ) because of it.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
In this instance your use of the term 'Akhenaten's wife' is pertinent because you are making a specific claim with regard to her identity. You are claiming that she is "Asiatic" so that being the case it's important to know who she is so that this claim can be verified. The point is, a historical figure as widely known as Nefertiti should be referred to by name... True she was indeed "his wife" but it makes no sense whatsoever to refer to Nefertiti (who is arguably more widely known than even Akhenaten himself) as simply "his wife" most Blacks have heard of her (They also identify her as BLACK) but not everybody knows she was Akhenatens wife. So the way I see it there are only two reason why you would not properly identify her... A) You really did not know Akhenatens wife was Nefertiti despite the fact that you had heard of her. Or B) You were aware that Nefertiti was Akhenatens wife...but you knew if you called her by name your claim that she was "Asiatic" would have been obviously false and everyone could see that...so you chose the more covert designation "Akhenaten's wife" instead.


Sorry buddy, no dice, Like I said the proof is in the 'search option' pudding. If I didn't know who Akhenaten's wife was I wouldn't have been able to post about the subject and THEM BOTH a myriad of times on this board. SO cut the bs. If you do that search(that you are so fond of when attempting to prove your point) You would also see that I mentioned she was an Asiatic before on other threads. SO please stop nit picking on a non-issue. Unless of course youare willing you concede that your use of Isis, Osiris, and Horus is far more convincing evidence that you are unfamiliar with the African communities prefferred usage of KMTic version of the Neters... Which is far mor convincing considering you do not have a postig history that shows any different... where as I do.


You know what Oshun? I just so happened to call your bluff on that little 'search option' you keep reminding me of. And guess what I discovered... this little gem here where you acknowledged that it was Akhenaten who STARTED monotheism in Africa with not even one mention of "Asiatic invaders" influencing him... here it is...

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Ankenaton, previousely known as Amenhotep IV. He was the first monotheist.


If what you said back then was true and he was the FIRST monotheist then how could someone have "influenced" him?...Moreover, I also discovered using the 'search option' that you NEVER made the claim that Nefertiti was "Asiatic" (at least that I found) prior to THIS thread (if so point out to me where along with data to support it as being fact). I did see a reference you made to Akhenaten being her husband so that means you knew that... which leads me to believe choice B) of the reasons why you did not say her name. You knew that by making a declarative statement like "Nefertiti was Asiatic" that nobody would believe it so you tried to ease it pass on the sly by saying "his wife"...nice try though. As I said before even IF she was "Asiatic" for the UMPTEENTH TIME what in the WORLD does that have to do with AKHENATEN starting monotheism in Africa???... You STILL in all your dancing have NOT answered this basic question.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

quote:
This isn't even the main point though,


No kidding... Really? Roll Eyes


Yes..Really not the MAIN point but still PERTINENT as I said...there is a difference you know, so you can roll your eyes, stomp your feet....well you know the rest.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
the real issue is how you keep avoiding the FACT that it was Akhenaten (not some "foreign invaders" as you keep claiming) who started monotheism in Africa. No amount of you blaming the Hyksos or you trying to throw Nefertiti under the chariot as being "Asiatic" is going to change that.


I guess you are not familiar with the terms I have always used on this and the previous thread... Asiatic INFLUENCE.



I don't care what terms you "always used" (as if that makes it true) I've already done the research and you can not provide ONE SHRED of evidence pointing to "Asiatic influence" being the cause of Akhenaten starting a monotheisic religion.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Remember, YOU were the one saying there were no Asians present that early on in KMT. All I was doing is showing that there were. Which is FACT.



*Correction* What I actually said was that Akhenaten started a montheistic religion long before any Asiatic INVASION remember I don't believe that the Hyksos "invaded" per-se. I believe it was more of an influx of various asiatic peoples/cultures as the Hyksos were not even a single group. In fact the Egyptians actually called them "hega-khase" which only means "rulers of foreign lands". It was not until the GREEKS labeled them "Hyksos" which is a mistranslation meaning "Shephard Kings" that some people erroneously started trying to link them as a single group like the Hebrews.

Furthermore, the Hyksos ruled Egypt close to 200 years BEFORE Akhenaten and even when they were in power they NEVER imposed any "foreign monotheism" on the Egyptians they just worshipped the same gods the Egyptians did. Besides even before they gained power they THEMSELVES believed in many gods...so where do you get off saying that this had any bearing on Akhenaten whatsoever? Especially, considering the fact that by the time he came on the scene they were LONG GONE...your position makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. You're just trying to patch a bunch of unrelated events together in order to try to back your claim that monotheism in Africa was due to an outside "invasion" and it's just not sticking.




quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
I don't know why you are even trying to pull such a stunt it's only making you look bad and everyone can see it... so you really need to stop and just come clean.

Come clean about what? The flow of the conversation is all there for everyone to read in the previous thread that this thread developed from... Which you curiously haven't linked, although I requested you to because I couldn't remember the title. Is it exposing something which makes you uncomfortable? You sure pulled up a non-relevant link on an entirely different subject with a quickness just to go back and forth with Heru... Strange.


Oshun, you REALLY do have a serious problem and a bad habit of creating double standards that you are unwilling/incapable of living up to yourself. So let me get this straight... YOU are making an allegation against ME in which you claim that I'm trying to hide something in the other thread yet YOU cannot even remember the thread in question. To make matters worse you want ME to do the leg work for YOU to find and link the thread that's allegedly supposed to prove YOUR point...Oh and wait whats more is that didn't you just inform me a while ago about the availability of the 'search function'? but you can't employ it yourself to find this mysterious thread that holds the key to all your points? Ok Oshun, since you are either too lazy/incompetent to provide links to your OWN points and you need to rely on me to do it. I'll help you out this time...The name of the thread was "Israel Bars Credible Observers from Gaza" here is the link also....

http://africanamerica.org/eve/...60213/m/54110433/p/8

Now if you notice there is nothing that I "avoided" in that thread I addressed everything that both you and Raptor said...Furthermore, I even copied the last part of our exchange in that thread to start this one for continuity...so your accusation (like a lot of what you're saying) is completely unfounded. For example if you notice in that thread you said that...

"The Hyksos were Expelled by Amose 100 yeears AFTER Akenaten's rule(fact), 'Exodus' by Moses... 100 years after Ankenaten's rule. [sic]

which is an absolute LIE because as I said before the Hyksos ruled Egypt about 200 years BEFORE Akhenatens reign... so this was just your feeble attempt to link the Hyksos to the Hebrews when there is no PROOF whatsoever to support this.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

I've answered all your questions, so you can cut the bs now.


The only questions you're answering are the redherrings you keep throwing into this discussion to deflect from the real issues...but as far as MY questions are concerned you've barely even scratched the surface...As far cutting the bs that's precisely what I'm doing whevever I call you out on yours...but I must say you are producing so much of it that cutting it is becoming a full time job.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
I know you fancy yourself a "non-literalist" but you are so focused on fulfilling that role you forget that somethings are indeed LITERAL. It is true our ancestors did make SEPARATE records from spiritual sciences and some of those records happen to be Biblical...


Please explain the mystical method of divination you use to 'separate' these supposedly 'already separate' historical records form the Helio Biblio Hybrid...


I don't mind answering any of your questions but as I keep telling you FIRST you must answer mine which you have NOT done...you are in NO position to be asking me anything...this is just another example of your double standards.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
You mentioned before, when there is not extra-Biblical evidence available, you just 'believe'. That doesn't cut it. Particularly since precicly where there is no extra-Biblical evidence for it literal history, are coincidentally the same instances where there is extra and pre-Biblical evidence showing that those supposed 'records' are a retelling of earlier cultures myths(not historical records). There is also extra-Biblical evidence that many of the 'mythical stories' in the Bible are based on previous cultures historical records as well... Oh what a tangled web a literary hybrid weaves.

That is a HUGE contradiction, that you cannot get around... Yet you just keep ignoring it.


Unlike you I'm not ignoring anything if you go back and actually read (something you seem hell bent on not doing) you will see when I addressed this by stating that Just because certain information may seem to parallel doesn't always mean it's derived from that source. I am indeed aware of the African orgins of the Bible which is why I consider the Hebrews to be Black and capable of writting accounts about not only Egyptian history but the own also. My point has been simply that even though we all know the Bible has been translated many times and there is no extra-biblical proof for EVERYTHING in it. It should not be viewed simply as a mythological book with no accurate historic records or no accounts of actual people.

I feel to do this throws the baby out with the bath water and robs us of a unique chance to see what life was like for those Black Hebrews that wrote it. Perhaps you feel differently and you only want to focus on KMT that's fine and dandy and is your prerogative....However, you must realize there are those of us who acknowledge the fact that Black civilization expanded beyond the limits of Egypt into what is known today as the "Middle east" which should really just be called Northern Africa but that's a different issue.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
the only reason you won't accept this is because of your own bias against monotheism. Furthermore, how in the world could the Hebrews have only 'invented' their history when even you have acknowledged that people mentioned in the Bible like King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba for example actually existed?


You comprehension must be low. I've stated OVER AND OVER that where extra-Biblical evidence is found, then historocity is accepted. There are HUGE amounts of extra-Biblical confirmation of Sheba historically existing(as you well know)... But the far earlier stores in the Helio Biblio that you are historizing and literalizing have NO extra-Biblical confirmation to take literally, and in fact, have been shown to be based on earlier cultures MYTHS(nature allegories), not their historical records, so the extra-Biblical info points to their NOT being literal. Get it?


Oshun, I find it quite laughable that you would dare question MY comprehension when YOU just got through relying on me to help YOU find a thread that's supposed to prove YOUR point. Besides, my earlier post already addressed what you go on to say about earlier accounts in the Bible that may coincide with earlier stories...However, it must be noted that overall these instances are FEW and FAR BETWEEN in the biblical records and MOST of the accounts are uniquely Hebrew with no Egyptian mythological correlation whatsoever. Now back to comprehension... Oshun I've proven on more than one occassion that questioning your comprehension is warranted...In this very thread I've shown that you've actually said things that you outright DENIED you did... without even taking the time to read for yourself. You made a bet with me and when you lost you tried to change what you said... You've made NUMEROUS historic blunders in the things you've been saying and after all that you STILL can't comprehend why people are saying the things about you that they're saying...go figure.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
P.S.

It's amazing that within that enormous litany of books you cut and pasted over here


Lol... Yes, a portion of my suggested reading list(on religion, there is a political one too) I provided someone with awhile back, and therefore keep in my yahoo for easy access, because I've been asked to provide it more than once by different people... I don't think it is enormous whatsoever... It's only 50-some-odd books. That isn't enough to fill a bookshelf. Confused


Ummm I love books to but we are not "trying to fill a bookshelf" here I think that part of the reason you seem confused on so many things is because of sensory overload you are just simply reading too many contradictory things....if you notice my list was all consistent...yours was ALL OVER THE PLACE as I said you even recommended books that backed me up....You are basically a Jack Jackie of all trades and master of none. I believe Shaya has a good point in that you may need to settle down a bit.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased.


Where did you get that from? You do realize Gerald Massey is featured on Africawithin... You know, that same site you pulled a quote from Dr. Ben from on the earlier thread? Were you aware that Black Classic Press had to republish his works because the mainstream wouldn't? I find it odd when people criticize authors they obviously haven't read a lick of. By the way, he lived from 1828-1907 so who wasn't a 'self taught' Egyptologist at that point? Are you saying you would agree with his conclusions if they sprung from the Euro-dominated field of that erra(who highly dissagreed with him)? Yes, I found a VERY SMALL amount of things that were offputting)not P.C.) in his words... but considering the time and his race, that was to be expected, just like it would be for Higgins and Anacalypsis. You do realize when he mentions the 'gorilla skull' it was in a passage where he was arguing Africa as the birthplace of humanity right? Even Garvey had a disparaging view of continental Africans(that disturbed me when I read it), and he was also a poet. Neither fact dismiss everything else the man wrote about. How about this, Read him and get back to me... Cuz your opinion of an unread author means ABSOLUTELY nothing.



*See my response to Raptor*

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
As well as recommendations to read "ALL" of Dr Ben's books (such as A Chronology of the Bible By Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
We the Black Jews - Yosef ben-Jochannon, The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins - Yosef ben-Jochannon, and The Black Man's North and East Africa - Yosef ben-Jochannan and George E. Simmonds) which are the very SAME ones I just recommended...


Skipped right passed the ones you left off your list which are considered his best works eh? Don't be so obvious next time... I said 'ALL' for a reason, you left off some VERY IMPORTANT works, or didn't you notice that.


What are you talking about? I recommended the books which I felt best proved the point I was making not the "best" based on some arbitrary standard you're referring to...you really do need to chillax.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
that would help PROVE my points because they back me up and everything I've been saying 100%....what gives?


Keep reading sweety... Like I said. We will never agree... So there is NO NEED to keep going back and forth when it isn't productive.



To you it may seem "unproductive" because this subject matter does not acquiesce to your particular brand of Theosophical/Naturalistic Pantheism. Although it is becoming quite productive to those of us who are taking note of the lengths you will go to in your usage of deflections, red herrings, strawmans/strawwomans, cover ups etc. Rather than just admit that you were wrong about something. One thing you got right though was a few pages back when you suggested that you should leave this thread....I couldn't agree with you more on that so do yourself a favor as well as those of us who once considered you to be a respectable poster quit while you're behind. Honestly, it's becoming ever increasing hard to watch what as I said before was once a respectable poster slide down the razor blade of DENIAL into an alcohol filled pool of DELUSION.
LieDecrypter,

The reason why I asked, was not an attempt to stump you.

For I try to leave my conclusions open to or for self reappraisal.

If "they" say what they say. I just wanted to know who said what, so that I may investigate why or how they've come to their conclusions.

Whether I may agree with them, in whole or in part, figure that they make interesting/different points or outright disagree, is what I attempt to determine afterwards.

Therefore, my asking was straight with no chaser.
quote:
I had in mind were neutral historians who don't have any particular slant either way but base their view on his work

Okay.

Let me have it.

Don't be stingy.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
*Correction* What I actually said was that Akhenaten started a montheistic religion long before any Asiatic INVASION remember I don't believe that the Hyksos "invaded" per-se. [b]I believe it was more of an influx of various asiatic peoples/cultures as the Hyksos were not even a single group. In fact the Egyptians actually called them "hega-khase" which only means "rulers of foreign lands". It was not until the GREEKS labeled them "Hyksos" which is a mistranslation meaning "Shephard Kings" that some people erroneously started trying to link them as a single group like the Hebrews.


So you think an influx that usurped the crown and had to be dethrowned wasn't equivalent to an 'invasion'. I think you are dancing now. BTW the Persians also invaded before the Arabs that you kept referring to...

quote:
Furthermore, the Hyksos ruled Egypt close to 200 years BEFORE Akhenaten and even when they were in power they NEVER imposed any "foreign monotheism" on the Egyptians they just worshipped the same gods the Egyptians did.


They actually devoted themselves to Set exclusively. No invaders 'imposed' a religion on KMT until much later in history(post Alexander) because all the invaders were trying to validate themselves by taking on aspects of the culture of the learned at that time. That does not mean they did not bring certain cultural influences and worldviews with them. In fact, it would be illogical to think that a foreign ruling power wouldn't have long lasting cultural influeces on a people they subjugate. Plus dethrowning, and expelling from a nation as a populace are two different things. Look at the long lasting ramifications of modern colonialism for example, and I'm not talking about religion but rather population and culture.

quote:
Besides even before they gained power they THEMSELVES believed in many gods...so where do you get off saying that this had any bearing on Akhenaten whatsoever?


The Hyksos have been linked with the Canaanites, which concidentally is where they went 'back to' after they were 'expelled' The religion they left with was a hybrid of the KeMewTic and Canaanite religions that developed into Hebraic monotheism. Are you gonna tell me that a 'coincidental' event happened where 200 years after they were dethrowned, a KeMeTic Pharoah, who had to be exposed to the cultural ramifications of their crown usurping, came up with a monotheistic religion post their kingly presence also? Then afterwards when their progeny were expelled(not exodudessed) and develop the same thing...I see a cultural trend their, not a coincidence.

quote:
Especially, considering the fact that by the time he came on the scene they were LONG GONE...your position makes ABSOLUTELY no sense.


Check above, people themselves can be long gone, or their direct power can be long gone(and they are still present as a population) but their influence can be felt for generations. And when it comes to KeMeTic history, 200 years is but the blink of an eye. The 'rapid' change we see in these days and times was not present...

quote:
You're just trying to patch a bunch of unrelated events together in order to try to back your claim that monotheism in Africa was due to an outside "invasion" and it's just not sticking. [/b]


Of course it doesn't for you.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Oshun, you REALLY do have a serious problem and a bad habit of creating double standards that you are unwilling/incapable of living up to yourself. So let me get this straight... YOU are making an allegation against ME in which you claim that I'm trying to hide something in the other thread yet YOU cannot even remember the thread in question.

To make matters worse you want ME to do the leg work for YOU to find and link the thread that's allegedly supposed to prove YOUR point...Oh and wait whats more is that didn't you just inform me a while ago about the availability of the 'search function'? but you can't employ it yourself to find this mysterious thread that holds the key to all your points? Ok Oshun, since you are either too lazy/incompetent to provide links to your OWN points and you need to rely on me to do it. I'll help you out this time...The name of the thread was "Israel Bars Credible Observers from Gaza" here is the link also.


I couldn't remember the title, but I remember your skipping past some questions I posed about literalism, but of course, a search on that word didn't help much. It wasn't laziness or incompetance... I just couldn't remember enough word content to pull it up consideriong it was way off topic from the original thread, and a thread quickly started here... But of course, I know you like your long insulting clowns... Hope you are satisfied after indulging yourself.

quote:
Please explain the mystical method of divination you use to 'separate' these supposedly 'already separate' historical records form the Helio Biblio Hybrid...


[b]I don't mind answering any of your questions but as I keep telling you FIRST you must answer mine which you have NOT done...you are in NO position to be asking me anything...this is just another example of your double standards.


Wow.. No answer? You said you would be willing to answer any previous unanswered questions and I KNOW I asked this before. If you refuse to do what you offered to do yourself, and then ask of others, than all we are going to hit is a brick wall. The above question focusses on my MAIN POINT about literalism, and you overtly avoiding it speaks volumes.

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
You mentioned before, when there is not extra-Biblical evidence available, you just 'believe'. That doesn't cut it. Particularly since precicly where there is no extra-Biblical evidence for it literal history, are coincidentally the same instances where there is extra and pre-Biblical evidence showing that those supposed 'records' are a retelling of earlier cultures myths(not historical records). There is also extra-Biblical evidence that many of the 'mythical stories' in the Bible are based on previous cultures historical records as well... Oh what a tangled web a literary hybrid weaves.

That is a HUGE contradiction, that you cannot get around... Yet you just keep ignoring it.


Unlike you I'm not ignoring anything if you go back and actually read (something you seem hell bent on not doing) you will see when I addressed this by stating that Just because certain information may seem to parallel doesn't always mean it's derived from that source. I am indeed aware of the African orgins of the Bible which is why I consider the Hebrews to be Black and capable of writting accounts about not only Egyptian history but the own also. My point has been simply that even though we all know the Bible has been translated many times and there is no extra-biblical proof for EVERYTHING in it. It should not be viewed simply as a mythological book with no accurate historic records or no accounts of actual people.


And an illogical answer... wow. I'm feeling quite confident that I've hit the literalist nail on the head.

quote:
I feel to do this throws the baby out with the bath water and robs us of a unique chance to see what life was like for those Black Hebrews that wrote it. Perhaps you feel differently and you only want to focus on KMT that's fine and dandy and is your prerogative....However, you must realize there are those of us who acknowledge the fact that Black civilization expanded beyond the limits of Egypt into what is known today as the "Middle east" which should really just be called Northern Africa but that's a different issue.


The specific things you are literalizing with no extra-biblical evidence, have mythological paralllels in more than just KMT. The Bible borrowed from other South West Asian cultures(so-called middle East) who also substantiate a Mythological/allegorical base for the things you are historicizing and literalizing that habe no extra-Biblical evidence. The Bible is a literary hybrid of MANY cultures. I've never limited it to KMT, and actually mentioned the Noah/Utnapishtim(Mesepotamian) parallel early on.

quote:
It must be noted that overall these instances are FEW and FAR BETWEEN in the biblical records and MOST of the accounts are uniquely Hebrew with no Egyptian mythological correlation whatsoever.


That is pattently false, and the book '101 books of the Bible' spells that out clearly.

quote:
Ummm I love books to but we are not "trying to fill a bookshelf" here I think that part of the reason you seem confused on so many things is because of sensory overload you are just simply reading too many contradictory things....if you notice my list was all consistent...yours was ALL OVER THE PLACE as I said you even recommended books that backed me up....You are basically a Jack Jackie of all trades and master of none. I believe Shaya has a good point in that you may need to settle down a bit.


Reading only those books that give you one worldview is insane to me. It keeps you in a box. IMO you can never read enough... I must admit I haven't argued the specifics of a lot of this for years, and have been concentrating on other subject matter, but to say you should only read and or suggest others to read things that already agree with your/their current information base or ideology is not a good thing IMO. It leaves no room for growth. In fact, I think it's a little frightenning. And no, it's not about 'filling a bookshelf', I just used that as a referrence to the small quantity. I was surprised at your use of the term 'enormous' for such a small list of books.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
[QUOTE]that there can be found references and quotes from the likes of Gerald "Massa" Massey who compares Blacks to Gorilla's in "Natural Genesis," and was a SELF TAUGHT Egyptologist/poet who's works are widely regarded as Theosophically biased.


quote:
*See my response to Raptor*


I have a question. have you read him? Or is your previous post saying that you just aren't interested in doing so?

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
What are you talking about? I recommended the books which I felt best proved the point I was making not the "best" based on some arbitrary standard you're referring to...you really do need to chillax.


I didn't realize that you selectively only listed books that proved your point until now. I'm not used to people reading or listing in a 'box' like that, particualrly when they seem fond of an author but omit his most infuential works.

Your refusal to answer the question I posed about literalism, after offering earlyu on to answer ANY previously unanswered questions, and your dancing around the other one on literalism, says all I need to know. It has proved my point. There is no need for any further interaction, because we won't ever agree, and that is the glaring example of why.

I may... and that's a big maybe, post if I find that the questions you left unanswered in the link you provided are worther of going into, but I remember them being about literalism too, so they probably were along the same lines as the one you are using a cop out excuse to not answer now.

It was nice talking to you.
Last edited {1}
Considering the fact that none of you were around to personally chronicle this insurmountable quagmire of ancient history, and all of you have obtained your information from similar second and third person sources the conclusion is you're all right. Now shut the fuck up and quit trying to make yourselves out to be some supernatural, omnipotent, omniscient beings of infinite wisdom--stop posting all these unecessarily elongated, self-edifying, self-exalting, ego-drenched posts of pointless, irrelevant, worthless information.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
Considering the fact that none of you were around to personally chronicle this insurmountable quagmire of ancient history, and all of you have obtained your information from similar second and third person sources the conclusion is you're all right. Now shut the fuck up and quit trying to make yourselves out to be some supernatural, omnipotent, omniscient beings of infinite wisdom--stop posting all these unecessarily elongated, self-edifying, self-exalting, ego-drenched posts of pointless, irrelevant, worthless information.


Wudda'matter rommy?

Still vex because no one would respond to your thread regarding condi rice?

What was it you said? Something about 17 views and ZERO replies? I mean, really...Who gets, to put it mildly, perturbed -because no one responds to their thread?

HOT GRITS!!! lol

Furthermore, scholars debate these things, all be it, I suppose, on a "scholarly level", that which we debate now.

Maybe you'd wanna consider it liking to barbershop talk, and keep it movin'.
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor:
LieDecrypter,

The reason why I asked, was not an attempt to stump you.

For I try to leave my conclusions open to or for self reappraisal.

If "they" say what they say. I just wanted to know who said what, so that I may investigate why or how they've come to their conclusions.

Whether I may agree with them, in whole or in part, figure that they make interesting/different points or outright disagree, is what I attempt to determine afterwards.

Therefore, my asking was straight with no chaser.
quote:
I had in mind were neutral historians who don't have any particular slant either way but base their view on his work

Okay.

Let me have it.

Don't be stingy.


I'm not withholding anything from you Raptor information is available to everyone...unless you want me to do the leg work for you to like Oshun...
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
*Correction* What I actually said was that Akhenaten started a montheistic religion long before any Asiatic INVASION remember I don't believe that the Hyksos "invaded" per-se. [b]I believe it was more of an influx of various asiatic peoples/cultures as the Hyksos were not even a single group. In fact the Egyptians actually called them "hega-khase" which only means "rulers of foreign lands". It was not until the GREEKS labeled them "Hyksos" which is a mistranslation meaning "Shephard Kings" that some people erroneously started trying to link them as a single group like the Hebrews.[/b]


So you think an influx that usurped the crown and had to be dethrowned wasn't equivalent to an 'invasion'. I think you are dancing now. BTW the Persians also invaded before the Arabs that you kept referring to... [/QUOTE]

First of all the primary account that there was an "invasion" was first recorded my Manethos who lived 1500 years AFTER the fact it's even mentioned in the Wiki link YOU first posted remember this .... Hyksos Now many scholars believe that it more the likely did not happen the way Manethos described who probably just took his own creative license about the events. Besides you mentioning the Persian invasion is yet ANOTHER one of your redherrings since they didn't invade until 525 B.C. around 1000 years AFTER the events we're talking about i.e. Akhenaten starting a monotheistic religion.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Furthermore, the Hyksos ruled Egypt close to 200 years BEFORE Akhenaten and even when they were in power they NEVER imposed any "foreign monotheism" on the Egyptians they just worshipped the same gods the Egyptians did.


They actually devoted themselves to Set exclusively. No invaders 'imposed' a religion on KMT until much later in history(post Alexander) because all the invaders were trying to validate themselves by taking on aspects of the culture of the learned at that time. That does not mean they did not bring certain cultural influences and worldviews with them. In fact, it would be illogical to think that a foreign ruling power wouldn't have long lasting cultural influeces on a people they subjugate. Plus dethrowning, and expelling from a nation as a populace are two different things. Look at the long lasting ramifications of modern colonialism for example, and I'm not talking about religion but rather population and culture.


Set was their MAIN god but not there only god and if by your own addmission they never imposed a religion on KMT then how could Akhenaten who DID impose monotheism on Egypt be influenced by them some 200 YEARS later...you are simply trying to stretch the real fact to fit YOUR belief and it won't work...especially when even YOU once stated....
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Ankenaton, previousely known as Amenhotep IV. He was the first monotheist.


Furthermore, when Amhose I and later dispelled the Hyksos and Thutmoses III finished the job... he virtually wiped out most of the traces of their rule so there were no "long lasting ramifications" on Egypt so your colonialism example falls FLAT on it's face. [/b]



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The Hyksos have been linked with the Canaanites, which concidentally is where they went 'back to' after they were 'expelled' The religion they left with was a hybrid of the KeMewTic and Canaanite religions that developed into Hebraic monotheism. Are you gonna tell me that a 'coincidental' event happened where 200 years after they were dethrowned, a KeMeTic Pharoah, who had to be exposed to the cultural ramifications of their crown usurping, came up with a monotheistic religion post their kingly presence also? Then afterwards when their progeny were expelled(not exodudessed) and develop the same thing...I see a cultural trend their, not a coincidence.


Are you kidding? The last time I checked there were many KeMeTic Pharoahs over the 200 years after the reign of the Hyksos how is it that none of this "monotheisic influence" skipped over ALL of them and just automagically effect Akhenaten some 200 years later? Your point is absolutely weak and unfounded and everyone can see that except you.



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Especially, considering the fact that by the time he came on the scene they were LONG GONE...your position makes ABSOLUTELY no sense.


Check above, people themselves can be long gone, or their direct power can be long gone(and they are still present as a population) but their influence can be felt for generations. And when it comes to KeMeTic history, 200 years is but the blink of an eye. The 'rapid' change we see in these days and times was not present...



Oh but wait in that mysterious thread that you said I was trying to hide....

http://africanamerica.org/eve/...60213/m/54110433/p/8

YOU claimed that... "The Hyksos were Expelled by Amose 100 yeears AFTER Akenaten's rule(fact), 'Exodus' by Moses... 100 years after Ankenaten's rule. [sic]

So if what you said then was true how could they have influenced him if they came AFTER him...don't try to answer that you're you'll only make yourself look even WORSE...you're in a deep enough hole as it is. [/b]

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
You're just trying to patch a bunch of unrelated events together in order to try to back your claim that monotheism in Africa was due to an outside "invasion" and it's just not sticking. [/b]


Of course it doesn't for you.


Yep, and no one else with good common sense either...

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Oshun, you REALLY do have a serious problem and a bad habit of creating double standards that you are unwilling/incapable of living up to yourself. So let me get this straight... YOU are making an allegation against ME in which you claim that I'm trying to hide something in the other thread yet YOU cannot even remember the thread in question.

To make matters worse you want ME to do the leg work for YOU to find and link the thread that's allegedly supposed to prove YOUR point...Oh and wait whats more is that didn't you just inform me a while ago about the availability of the 'search function'? but you can't employ it yourself to find this mysterious thread that holds the key to all your points? Ok Oshun, since you are either too lazy/incompetent to provide links to your OWN points and you need to rely on me to do it. I'll help you out this time...The name of the thread was "Israel Bars Credible Observers from Gaza" here is the link also.


I couldn't remember the title, but I remember your skipping past some questions I posed about literalism, but of course, a search on that word didn't help much. It wasn't laziness or incompetance... I just couldn't remember enough word content to pull it up consideriong it was way off topic from the original thread, and a thread quickly started here... But of course, I know you like your long insulting clowns... Hope you are satisfied after indulging yourself.


It's not that I like insulting or "clowning" people but when they give me as much material as you have it's inevitable



quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Please explain the mystical method of divination you use to 'separate' these supposedly 'already separate' historical records form the Helio Biblio Hybrid...


I don't mind answering any of your questions but as I keep telling you FIRST you must answer mine which you have NOT done...you are in NO position to be asking me anything...this is just another example of your double standards.


Wow.. No answer? You said you would be willing to answer any previous unanswered questions and I KNOW I asked this before. If you refuse to do what you offered to do yourself, and then ask of others, than all we are going to hit is a brick wall. The above question focusses on my MAIN POINT about literalism, and you overtly avoiding it speaks volumes.[/QUOTE]

No what speaks volumes it's how you just so happened to leave out the first part of my last reply which reveals that you told an outright LIE about Nefertiti...and the fact that you have not really answered ANY of my core questions.

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
You mentioned before, when there is not extra-Biblical evidence available, you just 'believe'. That doesn't cut it. Particularly since precicly where there is no extra-Biblical evidence for it literal history, are coincidentally the same instances where there is extra and pre-Biblical evidence showing that those supposed 'records' are a retelling of earlier cultures myths(not historical records). There is also extra-Biblical evidence that many of the 'mythical stories' in the Bible are based on previous cultures historical records as well... Oh what a tangled web a literary hybrid weaves.

That is a HUGE contradiction, that you cannot get around... Yet you just keep ignoring it.


Unlike you I'm not ignoring anything if you go back and actually read (something you seem hell bent on not doing) you will see when I addressed this by stating that Just because certain information may seem to parallel doesn't always mean it's derived from that source. I am indeed aware of the African orgins of the Bible which is why I consider the Hebrews to be Black and capable of writting accounts about not only Egyptian history but the own also. My point has been simply that even though we all know the Bible has been translated many times and there is no extra-biblical proof for EVERYTHING in it. It should not be viewed simply as a mythological book with no accurate historic records or no accounts of actual people.


And an illogical answer... wow. I'm feeling quite confident that I've hit the literalist nail on the head.[/QUOTE]

Nah, Maybe it's just your illogical interpretation...as far as you hitting the "nail on the head" yeah right you've missed the mark so many times your thumbs should be swollen by now.


quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

There is no need for any further interaction, because we won't ever agree
It was nice talking to you.



I guess we can end on this note and as long as one party is trying to be honest and the other is not...there will indeed never be agreement... In terms of whether it was nice talking to you as well on this...ummm lets just say it was revealing.
quote:
No what speaks volumes it's how you just so happened to leave out the first part of my last reply which reveals that you told an outright LIE about Nefertiti


Nope, like I've stated, Dr. Ben's scholarship is what convinced me that Nefertiti was Asiatic, Nefertari on the other hand is another story, and there is a reason she isn't focussed on, even though her name means "the MOST beautiful of them all"...

But just like focussing on the Semetic, or Cleopatra, we tend as a people to 'follow the lead' validating ourselves by what our oppressors hold in admiration. whn most of their focus is but one large distraction and in actuality an attempt at their own validation.

'Nice talking to you' was sarcasm of course. What wasn't dealt with was quite revealing.
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
I'm not withholding anything from you Raptor information is available to everyone...unless you want me to do the leg work for you to like Oshun...


I don't see the relevance in the remarks high lighted.

I'm asking you.

Me solo numero uno, for me solo numero uno.

Just name(s) source (book(s)) and I'll do the "leg work".

Perhaps I assumed that you had the sources on your person. Or on your shelf at home or where you are as you are reading my reply.

Yet if the sources are outside your domain (home or arms reach etc), then I belay my request.

Fuggidaboudit.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×