Skip to main content

I mean it really doesn't do us a damned bit of good to believe everything came from Egypt (even if it's true) if we're not doing anything now... If we're interminably paralyzed in the present... and we're NOT going to do anything great now if our first reaction is to always shoot down our most advanced thinkers...

Personally, believing I was at one time great doesn't do a damned thing for me now...

In fact, dwelling on the belief of "at-one-point-in-time-great" is one of the first signs of a has-been...

These are the balding pot bellied twice divorced alcoholics at high school reunions who never tire of repeating the story of that great touch down run in the Big Game of their Senior year...
Peace....

I do not think that scholars deny the connection between the proto semitic language and kemetic influences. The idea that the two are distinct is a fallacy. It is quite probable that Amen of ancient KMT is the origin of the use by the people of Shem. Shem according to the Tenahk, is the brother of Ham, according to many african scholars, including the illustrious Cheihk Anta Diop, Ham is derived from Kham, which is within the original name Khamit or KMT. If this is correct the proto semitic language is tied to the ancient believers of Amen.

Many Habiru cults such as the Nazarenes adopted Kemetic deities in secret. John the baptist was notoriously associated with the Essene, and Nazarene communities. these Jewish sects worshipped God as "Aumen" "The hidden one"...

Amen in ancient KMT is referred to as the "Hidden Light". Amen is the Son of the Earth, and the King of Men. Amen is used in the New testament as a name for Jesus... Laodicea: "These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation" Rev. (3, 14)

According to many scholars the Nazarene sect was a remnant of the religious order established by Moses, (the Kemetic heirogrammat according to George GM James) This would clearly establish the bibilical use to the kemetic use.

I agree with those in this thread who assert the racist agenda of past scholarship as it relates to this subject. This must be taken into consideration. Cheikh Anta Diop, JA Rogers. Van Sertima, etc, all have offered the public a view which would never climb over the requirement of peer acceptance in a world dominated by the idea of white supemacy. A strong gravitational field will bend light..A strong agenda toward an idea will bend the truth...The truth must be stronger than the whims of those who would keep the truth buried.

Sometimes you must stand on that which makes the most sense..even when the rest of your field rejects the idea..this is the root of all ingenuity.



Kai
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Doesn't it work both ways?

I mean, to you who, believe for example, that the Greeks borrowed all their best ideas from Egypt, and are believed by history to be great on account of it:

Wouldn't it be in our best interest to welcome all the best ideas from Europe? I mean let's ABSOLUTELY plunder Europe for the best ideas it has to offer ... Not just Europe... But Asia.... Africa.... Let's dig good ideas from everywhere...including our own

And then use them to help us do * our own thing *?

Instead of shooting down our own thinkers with the tired charge of "it can't be right just because it came from European scholars" ?

Wouldn't your black intellectuals tend to be among the best judges of what the best ideas from Europe or other places are?

We just keep going nowhere with this knee jerk anti-intellectual reaction...


HonestBro, you keep it honest like always! appl tfro

I like the quote that someone (his name escapes me at the moment) once said, "There is no White or Black or Yellow knowledge. Only knowledge."
quote:
Originally posted by Kai:
A strong gravitational field will bend light..A strong agenda toward an idea will bend the truth...The truth must be stronger than the whims of those who would keep the truth buried.


And which WHITE, GERMAN, AND JEWISH scholar first suggested that gravitational fields could influence the path of a light beam?

ALBERT EINSTEIN

for those who don't know..

quote:

Sometimes you must stand on that which makes the most sense..even when the rest of your field rejects the idea..this is the root of all ingenuity.


I won't pretend to be an authority... I only double majored in math and linguistics and extensively studied 10 languages... but sometimes - in fact, often times - words can resemble one another and still be completely unrelated...
Peace....


quote:
I won't pretend to be an authority... I only double majored in Linguistics and studied 10 langauges... but sometimes - in fact, often times - words can resemble one another and still be completely unrelated...


Okay...But in this case...the root use of Amen is Kemetic. The root of anything Semitic is African. If you accept the biblical version of history then Shem(Semites) is the brother of Ham(Kam).

If the two are sons of Noah, they spoke a common language. the languages are not cousins, they are brothers.

Both the Tanahk, and the Gospel, are products of students out of the Egyptian mysteries...I would consider this as a Prima facie evidence.

Now we can argue the validity of the Bible's origin and it's connection to the Ausarian drama...



Kai
quote:
Originally posted by Kai:
Peace....

Okay...But in this case...the root use of Amen is Kemetic. The root of anything Semitic is African. If you accept the biblical version of history then Shem(Semites) is the brother of Ham(Kam).



Yes I accept that the Semitic languages probably arose in Africa and yes ancient Egyptian and Hebrew are perhaps brothers (probably more like cousins - certainly in the same family)... By the way, this is not a controversial statement (debated but not controversial). It's commonly accepted. These languages are both in the Afro-Asiatic group (according to European scholars). Amharic, by the way, is also a Semitic language.

But even in brother languages, coincidences arise. Even in languages spoken by peoples with a great deal of historical contact, coincidences arise...

The final test is: Where's the evidence?

In the end, with no evidence, it's just speculation.

Anyway, why is it so important? Personally, I don't care or even consider the question particularly relevant...

PS: I'm not too attached to Biblical history - certainly not to the point of considering it authoritative or citing it in isolation to prove a point.
Last edited {1}
I am new to this forum and find it very interesting. Something to ponder; How is it that a word of "hebrew" origin has an antiquity of at least 5,000 years, possibly to 10,000 years? How is it that the same word can be incorporated into an Afrikan country and civilization prior to the origins of the word Hebrew? We find Afrikans in the Nile Valley using the word "amen" in names of pharoahs i.e., Amen-Hotep, Amen-ophis I, II, III, and IV, Amen-kare. The question of Greece and its supposed antiquity can only be answered after we deal with anything prior to this, documentation of this can be found in nominal works such as Stolen Legacy, Black Man of the Nile, and other works by Afrikan authors. We can also not dismiss the statement of Dr. John Henrik Clarke, "... the argument against Afrikan historians is irrelevant in as much as many of the historical facts were retrieved from european historians who had the resources to travel to the Nile Valley..." Note that these white historians were discounted by the schools of thought controlled by Euro-psuedo scholars because these brave men and women verified the existence of Afrikan dominance in the Nile Valley and mediterranean world. Just as now Afrikan historians are done the same. Any argument made anti-afrikan historians must be made against the few (very few) Euro-historians who claimed Afrikan power in Ancient Nile Valley culture that gave birth to Greek philisophical concepts.
As have I, and at no time did I ever mean a "slave" or a "worker," which the Czech word meant originally, which is why it appeared in a science-fiction work in the early Twenties and has been with us ever since.

When we use the word "debonair," we don't mean someone who smells good, though that is what the word meant originally.

And "malaria," no longer means "bad air," but rather a mosquito-borne disease.

One who is "dextrous" is able, not "right-handed," which is what the Latin term meant.

This whole discussion about the origin of "Amen" is silly since no one uses the word to mean an Egyptian god. The origin of a word is not the present meaning. Words slide and shift their meanings all the time. That's the nature of language. Meanings are taken from one word and given to another and the original word falls out of usage (the word "nice" has had about four meanings in its history), words are borrowed from other languages all the time. Most Spanish word with a "z" are taken from Arabic, and--speaking of Arabic--"alcohol" is from an old Arabic word meaning a powder used in eye-makeup, but I'll bet no one expects to drink powdered antimony in a tavern these days.

So it really doesn't matter where the word comes from, Egypt or Persia. It doesn't mean a god's name in common parlance today.

When Fine wears "beads," does she wear "prayers"? And if something is "genuine" is it on her "knees"? Is her "humor" a liquid? Is she a "pagan" if she comes from a rural area?

Anyway, that's my point. This whole thread is to no purpose.
When the French say 'Oui' they mean 'yes' but they sound (more) like they're saying 'We'... Are the words 'oui' and 'we' related in any significant way because they sound alike? The answer is NO.

Note: The Norman French once conquered England. The English lived for a time under French rule and the English language still bears many obvious French influences. But this is not one of them.

If you've spent a lot of time studying languages you'd realize that it's extremely easy to come up with examples like this... coincidences happen.... without more evidence it makes no sense whatsoever to dwell on the fact that the Hebrews have a word that looks similar to a Kemetic word... even if they have a common origin, they have different meanings... And it's entirely possible that they even have completely different origins as is the case with 'We' and 'Oui' ... even inspite of the close historical ties between France and England AND the fact that the languages are both Indo-European.
Last edited {1}
I don't see how fat men re-living their high school days equates with a people correcting their distorted history. I always find it interesting how some justfiy quoting their bigoted oppressors opinions calling it "scholarship" as if these entities are the final authority.

Your "massa" is a liar and if you are a xtian you have bought a fraudulent world view not just a religion. If you really believe that your world wide oppressor has been truthful about his history, let alone yours, you are not an intellectual, you are a fool.

Your oppressor is an occultist at the highest levels and he seperates you from your past and your ancestors in order to keep you bound. This is the basis for everything he does to you around the world. As long as you are bound he controls all of your resources, intellectual and otherwise. If you cannot accept that so be it, but your lack of acceptance does not make it untrue.

Sis Fine
Keep searching and beating that drum some people hear you.
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
I don't see how fat men re-living their high school days equates with a people correcting their distorted history. I always find it interesting how some justfiy quoting their bigoted oppressors opinions calling it "scholarship" as if these entities are the final authority.



I don't mind correcting the historical record in places where it has been either distorted or neglected altogether... I'm all for it...

What I don't care for is fabricating history...

And my analogy is perfectly apt when it's applied to those who are SO determined to see our history in the BEST possible light (no matter how much one must lie to do so) that they're willing to abandon EVEN those who are normally allies if they disagree with them on a point here or there.

That's a sign that one has more energy invested in the past than in fighting the battles of the present... certainly more than in dreaming the boundless possibilities of the future...

I'd say, in this instance, perhaps you are under the spell of the oppressor...
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
I'm not an X-tian...

Anybody whose been paying even a bit of attention would know that... I tend to be quite vocal on the subject... Remember me?

Melesi and I agree on PRACTICALLY NOTHING ELSE...

But we agree on this... WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU???? sck


That doesn't tell me anything at all and I never called you a xtian. My entire post is not for you. I can also assure you that I am under no spell whatsoever, but then you wouldn't know that would you?
Kai,

Great post. I wish you would post more often.

Speaking of Cheik Anti Diop(I thought about this thread last night and you stole my thunder by mentioning him.) I could have sworn he proved the linguisitic relations beyond a shadow of a doubt, even to the Euro-racist Egyptology 'board'...in fact I have that speach on CD...the actual one he presented to the 'established' intellectual community with a French interpretor, where they couldn't do anything but accept his findings.

Honest brother, have you read his work? What do you think about his ACCEPTED findings on linguistics and words like Amen in particular? We aren't arguing this point on some half assed non intellectual basis. Our African ancestoral scholars have done this work for us already. Folks like Melesi haven't read any of their work. If he has, he doesn't accept it because it counteracts the Western distortion of African(and world) history. That's my point and problem.

BTW, I think you took my remark about trusting Euro-racist intellectuals a little to personally. If the hat doesn't fit don't worry about it. Our people in general do that too often. I hope you aren't asserting you are the only 'intellectual' on the board... I'm definately not claiming I am one(I'm far from it) and I personally embrase our African intellectuals, but when an argument comes up like this about the word Amen...something I have read extensive material on and had put to rest when I was around 19 yrs. old, based on the findings of intellectuals... I must question who or what anyone who doesn't know this info is looking towards as the 'final word' on intellectualsism. Especially when there is no mention of the African scholors who have already argued the point to it's conclusion.

BTW, just because someone argues about African history, doesn't mean they aren't simultaneousely putting effot into our liberation... which our 'self knowledge' is a huge part of. To insinuate otherwise is ridiculous, especially considering you are posting on this same thread/argument.

What organizations concerned with moving are people forward are you a part of?... If you aren't a part of an organization, that's not a good sign. And this statement is meant for EVERYONE on the entire board. Africans get organized!

Just because someone isn't X-tian doesn't mean they have discarded the Western world view, although that is the first and sometimes last major leap we need to take. As much as I'd like to have thought I had discarded this twisted worldview at different points in my life, there have been, and continue to be daily reminders that I have not. Constructive criticism is always welcome. And it will always be given.

I don't look at African history through rose coloured glasses. Every society and people have their contradictions. But the fact that Greek society and Judeo-X-tianity are built on/plagerizations of Kemetic principles is old news to me.

We can and should learn from all people's but to adopt a warped worldview that is destructive from our oppressor is the antithesis of what needs to happen to move HUMANITY forward IMO.

And yes, I am in the avatar.

Fagunwa. I must agree with your post, of course. Nicely summed up. As usual.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
Speaking of Cheik Anti Diop(I thought about this thread last night and you stole my thunder by mentioning him.) I could have sworn he proved the linguisitic relations beyond a shadow of a doubt, ....Honest brother, have you read his work?


No scholar (outside of mathematics) proves anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. You can only put forth the best case possible. And then hope it survives peer review and contradictory evidence.

But I will check out Cheik Anti Diop... Because I am interested in knowing all the evidence.


quote:

I hope you aren't asserting you are the only 'intellectual' on the board... I'm definately not claiming I am one(I'm far from it) and I personally embrase our African intellectuals,


No... by no means whatsoever am I claiming to be the only intellectual on the board.... but I do take it personally when "intellectuals" as a group are indiscriminately attacked.

Black intellectuals - those who identify closely with the term as I do - lead a precarious existence. We're attacked by whites for defending black interests. Those like myself are attacked by conservative Christians (and religionists in general) both black and white for defending secular values, humanism, and intellectual freedom. We're attacked by black nationalists of all stripes for our independence...

After awhile you're like "Damn, f*ck all ya'll Roll Eyes "

Sorry if I seem touchy, but it seems like EVERYBODY'S favorite target is those bad old "intellectuals" and it gets pulled out at the drop of a hat. We're only welcome when we say the things that people like to hear... But speaking for myself at least, I'm not interested in saying only the things that you like to hear. I'm interested in saying what I believe to be true and relevant. And I will use whatever tools are at my disposal - even if they originated with European thinkers - to discover that truth if I believe in the soundness of the instruments.


quote:

but when an argument comes up like this about the word Amen...something I have read extensive material on and had put to rest when I was around 19 yrs. old, based on the findings of intellectuals... I must question who or what anyone who doesn't know this info is looking towards as the 'final word' on intellectualsism.


Oshun, I've spent much of my life in a library. There are MANY MANY books. They don't always agree with one another. And one can't read them all no matter how much you may wish to. My field of expertise is mathematics by the way ... I have engaged the topic of this thread to the best of my ability and knowledge. I've also personally spent hundreds of hours in the study of languages. So I'm not relying solely on European scholarship but also on a great deal of first hand personal experience.

If you wish to convince me, don't insult me. Just tell me something that I don't know. I'll check out the authors you mention.

quote:

What organizations concerned with moving our people forward are you a part of?... If you aren't a part of an organization, that's not a good sign. And this statement is meant for EVERYONE on the entire board. Africans get organized!


Don't worry about me... I'm doing my part.... In my own way...
Last edited {1}
quote:
Virtue--May I ask?

Has not the system of agnostic learning been set up by a European bias?

Is not it in our (non-European) interest to seek out alternative ways of looking at things that have been overlooked out of bias or hatred?

Is it not true that many of the historical and "official" documents most scholars use to base their work presently based off the "recognized" scholarship of those in the past with a consistent bias?

If I am wrong forgive me..... I do earnestly seek truth......

However, it is a little troubling to me that bias is often used against anyone that questions (even with hubris) the status quo.... and the status quo happens to maintain a history that is biased..... against us.....

I see nothing wrong with investigating..... sincerely..... and questioning..... and re-evaluating..... but we all bring biases to whatever we do..... that doesn't mean I don't believe in objective research.......

it simply means that as far as I can tell, historically many new theories were challenged as crackpot, having ulterior motives, or plain unscientific (or un-whatever the standard measuring bearer was at the time)--especially in European history........

I guess...... I find it interesting that a word like Amen that has been translated in different languages....... to be spoken today as ....... "Amen"........ is used with frequency in many spiritual fields.... with some importance.....

I think it warrants investigation........

The motive for investigation may be biased.....

however, the method of scholarship does not have to be..... nor does it have to be shut down because of another bias.....

the bias of keeping the status quo....

Please advise....



Peace,
Virtue


Amen appl Amen
As long as we're going to cover our ears and just shout past one another repeating ourselves

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:

I hope you aren't asserting you are the only 'intellectual' on the board... I'm definately not claiming I am one(I'm far from it) and I personally embrase our African intellectuals,


No... by no means whatsoever am I claiming to be the only intellectual on the board.... but I do take it personally when "intellectuals" as a group are indiscriminately attacked.

Black intellectuals - those who identify closely with the term as I do - lead a precarious existence. We're attacked by whites for defending black interests. Those like myself are attacked by conservative Christians (and religionists in general) both black and white for defending secular values, humanism, and intellectual freedom. We're attacked by black nationalists of all stripes for our independence...

After awhile you're like "Damn, f*ck all ya'll Roll Eyes "

Sorry if I seem touchy, but it seems like EVERYBODY'S favorite target is those bad old "intellectuals" and it gets pulled out at the drop of a hat. We're only welcome when we say the things that people like to hear... But speaking for myself at least, I'm not interested in saying only the things that you like to hear. I'm interested in saying what I believe to be true and relevant. And I will use whatever tools are at my disposal - even if they originated with European thinkers - to discover that truth if I believe in the soundness of the instruments.


It's this sorta back and forth crap over nothing that leads to us never having anything...

amen.... amen... a few scraps of syllables on a page ... and what makes it worse is that its function in Hebrew is mostly trivial. It's basically a period... Roll Eyes

Whatever... Obviously my contributions are not welcome on this thread....
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

It's this sorta back and forth crap over nothing that leads to us never having anything...

amen.... amen... a few scraps of syllables on a page ... and what makes it worse is that its function in Hebrew is mostly trivial. It's basically a period... Roll Eyes

appl
Exactly, thats what makes this truly sad.
Sad indeed....

I think its sad when we get into defining each other's motives..... (on both sides)....

I haven't heard an anti-intellectual sentiment....

presumably that's what lures or keeps us here at AfricanAmerica.org....

Intelligent.Black.Community

again I don't sense any anti-intellectual sentiment......

just one that questions the source of "authority" that's used to bolster arguments.....

that should be healthy debate.....

at least I can speak for my response......

I was pointing out the interesting phenomenon of relying on a system that has maintained a bias against anything Black then having a Black man defend the institution.... seemingly unquestionably....

I could be wrong.....

can we begin there? Because there seems to be a discrepancy over authenticity of historical data and interpretation and the methods(biased or no) with which one determines such...


Peace,
Virtue
Am I reading this thread correctly? Did Cheikh Anta Diop put forth effort at trying to prove that the word "Amen" from hebrew is a related to the name of Kemetic God Amun?

I mean, I have no problem believing that they're related words -- Amen means "verily," and I see a relationship between "truth" and that which is brought to "light."

The languages are both Semitic, and so it's possible either that one derived from the other
or that they BOTH derived from some earlier, proto-Semitic word having something to do with light.

But Diop... Is this precise question -- the relationship between these words -- really the subject of intense scholarly debate? (Not that I respect most of Diop's findings on matters like this, but still...)
The real debate as I see it.... is not the minor points of argument like "Amen" that come to play....

It is the underlying argument....

One of authorship and standards....

Whose interpretations of historical data and what parts of that historical data determines our current perceptions and understandings of history....

it is significant....

because this effects many areas of life....

education....

socio-cultural practices and biases.....

as well as plain old self-identity.....

and so forth....

Peace,
Virtue
quote:
Originally posted by virtue:

I haven't heard an anti-intellectual sentiment....



Oh really????? Eek

An anti-intellectual sentiment is when you brush aside men who have spent years of their lives acquiring actual credentials, who are professional intellectuals, who have actually invested a lot of time studying the issues relevant to this discussion...with the charge "Oh that's white man's knowledge" as an excuse to ignore our judgement...

That's PROFOUNDLY anti-intellectual

And it's not too much better than people accusing you of acting white because you like to read...
quote:
Originally posted by virtue:


I haven't heard an anti-intellectual sentiment....

Because there seems to be a discrepancy over authenticity of historical data and interpretation and the methods(biased or no) with which one determines such...


Peace,
Virtue


So who on this board is familiar with the methods of interpreting and/or verifying the authenticity of historical data???? Who on this board actually knows more than two or three languages well??????

I'm not saying you're unintelligent. I agree that we have a lot of smart people on this board. And I'm not impugning anyone's motives... I am saying you lack the expertise and the perspective to make judgements in the issue under discussion ...

My charge of "anti-intellectualism" is backed up by the fact that the few of us who can be said in any way to fit this description are being written off as being under the "control of the white man" because we dispute what everyone else here wants to believe....

That's an expression of a profoundly anti-intellectual impulse....
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

Virtue, you have such a talent for feigning innocence...
I never claimed innocence....

never charged guilty of anything...

if you perceive innocence...... it maybe because I try my best to sincerely uphold moral principles and values....

but you are entitled to your opinion...

Please refrain from attacking me personally....

I don't have time now....

But I will gladly return and answer your other concerns....

Peace to you....


Virtue
quote:
Originally posted by virtue:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

Virtue, you have such a talent for feigning innocence...
I never claimed innocence....

never charged guilty of anything...

if you perceive innocence...... it maybe because I try my best to sincerely uphold moral principles and values....



I don't percieve innocence...

What I'm referring to is the way you led the discussion off with a DEEPLY anti-intellectual question (re "the system of agnostic [European] learning") and then claimed not to see any anti-intellectual sentiments.

You gotta be kidding right???

And THEN have the nerve to talk about personal attacks?

How much more deeply personal can you get than to imply that us educated negroes can't be trusted because we're brainwashed by whitey ?
Last edited {1}
quote:
No scholar (outside of mathematics) proves anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. You can only put forth the best case possible. And then hope it survives peer review and contradictory evidence.


Unless I agree with it then you can be sure I will have an emotional outburst. Then I will argue that those who disagree with me neither have advanced degrees nor do they speak more than one language. That I don't know this for sure doesn't matter.

I will then disrespect two of the classiest ladies on this board (Virtue and OA) by cursing at her because it hurts me not to be agreed with by you lesser educated intellects.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
quote:
No scholar (outside of mathematics) proves anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. You can only put forth the best case possible. And then hope it survives peer review and contradictory evidence.


Unless I agree with it then you can be sure I will have an emotional outburst. Then I will argue that those who disagree with me neither have advanced degrees nor do they speak more than one language. That I don't know this for sure doesn't matter.

I will then disrespect one of the classiest ladies on this board (Virtue) by cursing at her because it hurts me not to be agreed with by you lesser educated intellects.


No I'm not going to have an emotional outburst... or even a profound intellectual observation... because I'm done with this subject...

I will leave you to marvel at your fictional past and fanciful etymologies... while I actually go out and do something constructive...

Have a good time tfro
Look: I never questioned the intelligence of anyone participating in this thread.

I merely asked a sensible question which I'll translate in the following way:

Who do you trust to do heart surgery on you? A trained doctor who has studied and practiced many years? Or a very intelligent person who is bright and curious and means well but has only occasionally browsed Grey's Anatomy?

I'm not insulting anyone by implying there's a difference between the two choices...

And I apologize if anyone was offended.


But Jesus Christ, people, the choice was made to go "personal" JUST AS SOON As someone decided to write off "intellectuals" as a class

Add Reply

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