Skip to main content

How is the discussion supposed to proceed when it seems that "scholars" - anyone who has been through the "system of agnostic [European] learning" - have been disqualified from the beginning?

quote:
Originally posted Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by virtue:
May I ask?

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


appl appl appl

But I would have to add that the his-story so many people refer to has been all out FALSIFIED to bolster the worldview of our oppressor. Not so long ago the same intellectual community tried to say that great Zimbabwe was created by a semetic people that came to South Africa in search of King Soloman's mines... this BS was actually taught and believed by the same people that are considered 'scholars' today. The European view of history and even the catagorizations used for the world's people and languages is ALL highly suspect.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
That's HB's quote.
Thank you Fagunwa....

I was aware of that.....

I was just hoping to acknowledge that I am cognizant of what scholarship is...... by agreeing....

My comments earlier were an attempt to begin dialogue regarding the disagreement on the bias in scholarship even when the methods are followed......



Sigh....
Peace,
Virtue
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
I understood Virtue I just wanted to give HB credit. I don't think anything you said would have gotten it done though, it seems we have stubbed a toe.


Stubbed a toe?.... You've failed to address anything I've said...You haven't done anything but ignore me... That is Bury your head in the sand...

Again, Melesi and I haven't agreed on anything up to this point... That we agree at all is remarkable..

How interested are you in the truth if you fail to take note of this one point of agreement?...

Anyway, I've ceased to care...

If you wish to embrace fairy tales so be it. That's your right.
I don't think you all have any idea of how destructive (and counter-productive) this "anti-intellectual" tendency is. Those FEW of us who go through American Universities and survive, spend years with our own questioning, questioning our professor's biases, questioning our classmates' biases, DEFENDING OUR PEOPLE, often times being the only one there, often time being the first one there... you spend LITERALLY years... maybe even decades of your life in the active pursuit of knowledge - that is not simply parroting your professors - sometimes even opposing your professors.... you have ULCERS at the end of the process... Then as faculty you're expected to singlehandedly represent black interests - again being the ONLY one there... often times opposing white colleagues...

I was the ONLY African American (on record) in my graduation year to receive a Ph.D. in mathematics... in the whole country... I was the first black faculty member in my department...

And then your own damned people come with this "white man's knowledge" bullsh*t. Like I'm sorta robot. The first ones coming with this "Nigga, who do you think you are?" sh*t are the black ones...

THEN YOU WANT TO ASK WHAT I'M DOING FOR OUR PEOPLE????

Stubbed a toe? Indeed...

You have no idea how disgusted I am....

And I shouldn't even be that offended... because the closest academic "expert" here on these particular matters is Kresge...
Last edited {1}
Peace....


quote:
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?


This was not the express purpose of Cheikh Anta Diop's work, however, included within Professor Diop's findings is the requisite evidence necessary to demonstrate a very well established union between the original practices, and language of the hebrews, with that of the people in ancient Kemet.

quote:
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 relationship between the words goes far beyond the interpretation of the term. The Bible was prepared by students out of the Kemetic Mysteries. This thread questions the correlation between the Hebraic root of the word "Amen" and the kemetic root usage. Of course it is obvious upon simple examination that the hebrew religion is not the same as Kemetic orthodoxy, however, the religion, and customs of the hebrew is tied to the parent culture which is ancient KMT, and the parent religion which is Maat.

And so to sum this up, when a Christian, Jew, muslim or other ends a prayer by saying "Amen" they are reproducing an act of religious devotion originally intended to invoke "The Hidden One"....

quote:
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


The possibilty has grown to a very strong probability if we pay attention to the works of our own scholars.

quote:
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...)



Not really...I think things took a turn here once someone implied that the semitic hebrew usage of "Amen" may have developed independent of the other semitic usage...This idea is very problematic considering that the languages developed in the same area, and share a parent language...

And by the by, providing scholarly research, relevant to this topic, is where Cheikh Anta Diop made some of his greatest contributions. Diop was heavily criticized by his peers, however in open debate, his detractors were silenced by the ovewhelming clarity of his findings.



Kai
quote:
Originally posted by Kai:
Not really...I think things took a turn here once someone implied that the semitic hebrew usage of "Amen" may have developed independent of the other semitic usage...This idea is very problematic considering that the languages developed in the same area, and share a parent language...


Not problematic at all if you'd actually read any of my posts... those sorts of coincidences happen frequently. I CAN SUBSTANTIATE THIS CLAIM WITHOUT CITING OTHER SCHOLARS... I can present the evidence for this directly... and I don't think it's an established fact they have the same parent...

But whateva... I see that the only black "scholars" we like are the ones who say what we want to think...
quote:
Originally posted by Kai:
Peace....


quote:
Not problematic at all if you'd actually read any of my posts... and I don't think it's an established fact they have the same parent...


Are you now implying that the language of ancient egypt is different than the language of the original hebrew scriptures?


Kai


I'm claiming that ancient Egyptian is different from Hebrew
Peace...


quote:
I'm claiming that ancient Egyptian is different from Hebrew


Well what would you say when someone points out that the habiru or hebrews are themselves egyptians for much of their history?

The Hebrew people were embedded in Egypt as we are embedded in america. this is consistent with the biblical version of history and the academic view.

Of course there are differences in dialect, however, they are closely related. they are both semitic. the semitic origin of Hebrew, and the language of the people of KMT is not actually disputed in academic circles.

Peraps "Amen" became a colloquialism for the hebrew...who knows...But one thing that I cannot see room for is the independent creation and usage of the same term with completely different meanings during the same period of time in such a small area. Anything is possible...so of course aliens could have secretly created the term...but if we stick to research, and logic, we will probably determine that the Hebraic usage stems from the Kemetic usage...



Kai
Peace....

quote:
Kai, thank you for the effort at dialogue. I appreciate it.



No problem..I figured it was worth a try.

Perhaps you would be interested in researching the History of what the ancients called "Mdw Ntr". This was the script and language of the elite in KMT after foreigners arrived and settled in the country. Other less formal ways of communicating developed among the commoner.

The Hapiru (Hebrew) were a an egyptian people for centuries..

Perhaps this is new to you...

Just look into it.
quote:
Not really...I think things took a turn here once someone implied that the semitic hebrew usage of "Amen" may have developed independent of the other semitic usage...This idea is very problematic considering that the languages developed in the same area, and share a parent language...


Kai your statement is precisely correct.

The term Semitic/Hebrew is an oxymoron.

The word [Semitic] implies "mixed" races which the original "Afrim/"Ivrim" people were not! They originated from these main tribes which originated in ancient Black African Egypt and exist today in Ghana as:

Akuapen
Akuamu
Akyem
Assini
Bono
Fante
Kwahu
Sefwi
Wassa and
Denkyira

And the word [Hebrew] implies an association or connection with Egypt which it is not, because the words "Jew" and "Hebrew" did not come into existence until after the "Afrim"/"Ivrim" people (i.e. the word "Afrim"/"Ivrim"--is an akan word of Ghana that means breaking off from the main group) went off to Europe.

Any reference to these words in the ambiguous biblical account of Man walking the Creator thru history is in "afterthought" and purposefully intended to fool the very elite!
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
I don't think you all have any idea of how destructive (and counter-productive) this "anti-intellectual" tendency is. Those FEW of us who go through American Universities and survive, spend years with our own questioning, questioning our professor's biases, questioning our classmates' biases, DEFENDING OUR PEOPLE, often times being the only one there, often time being the first one there... you spend LITERALLY years... maybe even decades of your life in the active pursuit of knowledge - that is not simply parroting your professors - sometimes even opposing your professors.... you have ULCERS at the end of the process... Then as faculty you're expected to singlehandedly represent black interests - again being the ONLY one there... often times opposing white colleagues...

I was the ONLY African American (on record) in my graduation year to receive a Ph.D. in mathematics... in the whole country... I was the first black faculty member in my department...

And then your own damned people come with this "white man's knowledge" bullsh*t. Like I'm sorta robot. The first ones coming with this "Nigga, who do you think you are?" sh*t are the black ones...

THEN YOU WANT TO ASK WHAT I'M DOING FOR OUR PEOPLE????

Stubbed a toe? Indeed...

You have no idea how disgusted I am....

And I shouldn't even be that offended... because the closest academic "expert" here on these particular matters is Kresge...


HonestBro, you have NO idea how much I can empathyze with what you just said. As an African-American in college with International Studies as a Major, I go through the same thing. sad

In my math classes, economics and politics classes, I sometimes find myself THE ONLY African-American in the class. And I most often find myself in opposition to the rhetoric of the professors (who mostly espouse typical Western bourgeois perspectives). I find myself often in opposition to the majority of the opinions of my classmates (almost all of whom are White).

I'm in International Studies because I wish to get in a field where I can get in on having an impact on world events to benefit people in third and second-world countries (Africa is my primary focus). All of this only to be told that I'm a "sellout" by some of my Black peers who aren't doing anything with their lives, or told that I'm a "White man" for not being "anti-intellectual" or not being blindly Afrocentric (believing that everything in the world was directly influenced by African culture).

IT MAKES YOU WANNA HOLLA, DON'T IT? bang
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
AMEN!


Stay strong, EP, my brother.... You're not the first and, unfortunately, probably won't be the last ... But it can be done...


Thank you, bro! I sincerely appreciate having support from a like mind. tfro


It ain't easy being a Black Leftist, pro-Black, pan-African, anti-Free Market Globalism, anti-War, anti-Corporatist, pro-Environmentalist in majority White college in a conservative, rural mountain environment. The majority of my White classmates are either conservative, moderate or moderate liberal (and most of the cirriculum taught fosters this) so naturally that makes me an odd man out much of the time amongst these people who are comfortable with the status quo.

I'm not so different than Fagunwa and Oshun Auset, yet being in college makes some people assume that I'm like Constructive Feedback.

quote:
Did you get the article I PMed to you?

It can be useful to find a few like minds...


Sure did. Cool I've been on hiatus for a while, so I just recently noticed it. This guy's from my college? Wow! I think I might get closer to that professor.....
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
I'm not so different than Fagunwa and Oshun Auset, yet being in college makes some people assume that I'm like Constructive Feedback.


There's nothing wrong with being like any of these people... I'm sure they're all worthy individuals in their own way... What I support is each of us allowing others of us the space we need to discover and be ourselves...

You can't support Black liberation without supporting the liberation of black persons...

By which I mean that it makes no sense to me when people claim to be for the freedom of black people and then proceed to put a number of moreorless arbitrary restrictions on what it is a truly free black person can think, experience, and be.

If we're going to support some "black scholars" like Cheikh Ante Diop, then we need to support the intellectual independence of the black scholar generally. Without that independence - to go where the evidence and your instincts lead - one can't truly be a scholar to begin with.

Hell... some days I'm like Oshun... Some days I'm like Constructive Feedback... Some days I'm like Empty Purnata .... You gotta live a little ... Big Grin
Last edited {1}
I just caught up on reading most of this thread... Just a question HB, am I supposed to trust what you say as a linguist when you haven't ever heard of or read someone like Chiek Anti Diop before? IMO that means you never heard the evidence that Kai laid out so eliquently...in other words, you were missing the African centered argument. SInce that was something I could tell, or rather 'knew' by your post...doesn't that back up the idea that the Western educational system is not exactly fostering 'our perspective' of history or acadamia?
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I just caught up on reading most of this thread... Just a question HB, am I supposed to trust what you say as a linguist when you haven't ever heard of or read someone like Chiek Anti Diop before? IMO that means you never heard the evidence that Kai laid out so eliquently...in other words, you were missing the African centered argument. SInce that was something I could tell, or rather 'knew' by your post...doesn't that back up the idea that the Western educational system is not exactly fostering 'our perspective' of history or acadamia?


Firstly, I'm not an Africanist nor an Egyptologist.... Never claimed to be .... I'll repost the following:

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

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.


And I have spent a hell of a lot time studying languages. For more than a decade I was in the practice of learning one new language every year. And I have a degree in the subject. So I do have some amount of expert knowledge. Virtue asked about the methodology. One does not have to be an Africanist to make general observations about linguistic methodology. And so I attempted to explain:

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by virtue:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by Melesi:
1. Meaning is as the word is used. Nobody uses the word like that, therefore that's not what the word means.

2. Moreover, the etymology may not be right. It could be from a similar but different Hebrew word, amman.

3. Be careful of similar-counding felicities. They are usually wrong.

4. Be careful of your motives.



I agree with Melesi here (will wonders ever cease?)

But it frequently happens in linguistic research that one encounters similar sounding words. Just because two words sound or look similar it doesn't mean that they are related in any way. Similarity can be coincidental. So there are methods that are more or less reliable for determing if they are truly related. In the absence of evidence all else is speculation.
I know nothing of etymology.... what is the method? And why if the same word pops up in major religions around the world as well as translated from ancient texts as such is this not cause for serious investigation?


Peace,
Virtue


Let's take English as a case study. English has borrowed extensively from other languages:

theology, logic, skeptic (are all from Greek)

paternity, ad hoc, ad hominem (come from Latin)

kindergarten (from German)

Yenta (from Russian)

smorgasbord (Swedish)

The tendency to borrow from Greek and Latin is most intense in the areas of scholarship and higher learning.

Whereas things like "smorgasbord" seem to have been retained almost randomly (and reflect our immigrant history).

But in all cases conscious borrowing tends to show similarity (or at least analogy) of usage between the source language and the corresponding English term. In the case of 'smorgasbord', for example, the English term denotes something like a meal in which there is a large variety of dishes to choose from (like a buffet). But the Swedish source (if I remember correctly) denotes the buffet table itself.

There has also been a very heavy French influence in English since the Norman invasion. But we still say that English is a Germanic language. So on what basis do we make that determination? Look at basic items of vocabulary (words that even children know):

English:German

mother:mutter

father:vater

daughter:tochter

son:sohn

maid:madchen

wife:weib

house:haus

word:wort

say:sag

drink:trinken

good:gut

thank:danke

morning:morgen

red:rot

water:wasser

bread:brot

hound:hund

brother:bruder

sister:schwester

stone:stein

dream:traum

sleep:schlaffen

Point? You see an extensive system of similarity between terms which have more or less the same meaning - and English and German are separated by a few thousand years. There are in addition fairly predictable rules governing the way pronunciations have diverged over time.

Sister Fine, I love you (and usually admire your intentions) ... I'm no expert but if Hebrew were an offspring of Akan it would not be such a well kept secret.

I'll be back to finish.....


This was NOT "European scholarship". I wasn't looking down at some book or getting this from a website. I typed this directly from my knowledge of these languages. I chose English and German because I wanted to use an example that everyone could understand - since we all know English.

I also gave a few links about the subject of language classification. I'll note here that even European scholars disagree about specific classifications. My point was that there is a large body of scholarship in place based on the methods which I was attempting to explain.

Check out the following article by Anta Diop. He uses the same methods (in the latter portion of the paper on the linguistic evidence for his claims) which I attempted to elucidate and which a European scholar would use. He also cites European scholars:

http://www.africawithin.com/diop/origin_egyptians.htm

The only difference is that he considers a hypothesis - and consequently data - that a European scholar might not consider... and here is where the issue of cultural bial is most relevant.

PS: I fail to see any "evidence" laid down by Kai. He made a few vague assertions (some of them wrong) and then vaguely cited Anta Diop and van Sertima who, as far as I can tell, had nothing to say about this particular topic anyway even if you were tempted to accept their general point of view.


PSS: Just because an assertion is "Pro-Africa" or "Afro-centric" doesn't mean it's correct.

PSSS: It is still possible that your claims about the origin of the word "amen" may be correct... but so far no one on this thread has produced a shred of legitimate evidence.
Last edited {1}
I stand by the position that the anti-intellectual diatribe against "European education" was out of line and misdirected. Anti-intellectual because indiscriminate, uninformed, and dangerously misdirected. And whether we own up to it or not it was deeply insulting to many sincere and committed (BLACK) people who spend their lives pursuing knowledge.

And if you're really serious about being pro-black and pro black progress then irrational and irresponsible attacks on the black intelligentsia in the universities needs to stop.
quote:
--HeruStar--riddled with GREEK misinterpretation, and misunderstanding. It is a European attempt at comprehending African thought. I cringe because they (Europeans) get to write the history books and portray these misconceptions as fact/truth.


I too, cringe, HeruStar!

It is true -- "Greek misinterpretation" does in fact have e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g off track -- in general -- and the true meaning of the work A-M-E-N -- in particular.

Greeks knew nothing about the true essence of "Black Antiquity" -- and to this day they still don't want to know or care to know. They are copycat counterfeiters-in-denial of the truth/facts.

In fact, the root of this very book [i.e. "basic instructions before leaving earth - the Bible] has its origin in "Egypt" -- not Greece/Greek and certainly not Hebrew/Jew.

On the one hand The Church, Europeans and now 'Western Civilization' have done a fantastic job of corrupting "African Thought" that came into existence via the Egyptians; who were Africans -- to wield/yield their own unique form of power and control while on the other hand enjoying it's fruits:

"...By the time the Greeks, the Romans, and the European Christians awoke to claim greatness, the Ancient Egyptian Africans had 'already' performed/executed/fulfilled/carryed out/produced and created 'all' the greatest feats in the world for mankind:

Civilization
Theosophy
Gods
Monotheism
Agriculture
Mining
Manufacturing
Engineering
Transportation
Postal Service
Commerce
Finance
Education
Schools of government
Paper and ink
Writing systems
Books
Libraries
Alchemy
Science
Mathematics
Astronomy
The calendar
Anatomy
Physicology
Medicine
Surgery
Hygiene
Architecture
Painting
Music
Art
Sculpture & Philosophy and every possible concept that has made modern civilization be what it is today.... -- p.140, "The Africans Who Wrote the Bible" by Dr. Alex Darkwah.

Surprisingly enough, the world still believes the lies and concealments that come out of the mouths of the Church [i.e. catholism], Europe and now 'Western Civilization'. I reject this false process, totally-since I know that the true essence of the spirit of the Creator does not in fact, reside from within these false institutions!

However, there is hope. Africa -- the Sleeping Giant -- is waking up. Although Europe, the Church and now 'Western Civilization' perceived otherwise, her memory was always been intact and she will have the last say -- and, all the lies and concealments of the past cannot coverup this ever evolving reality!
What's the point of this huge conspiracy theory?... Even if it's true, for example, that my ancestors built the first wheel 8000 years ago, what good is knowing this if we're not even building the best bicycles now?

And, being a mathematician, I can say with a fair amount of certainty, that though a great deal of Greek mathematics might have have originated in Egypt, mathematics is like Engineering. It's not static knowledge... It doesn't stand still. Today's advances are built on yesterday's old news. And I can say with confidence that Europe has produced some fantastic mathematical feats in the past century alone. Arguably the most impressive in history...

Arguing for the greatness of Egyptian mathematics today is like suing to regain the $100 that was stolen from your ancestor 500 years ago and failing to take into account the interest that has accrued on this money in the subsequent years. It's kinda pointless.

This is not to insult the ancestors... or deny to Africa what is hers - which no doubt is considerable... This is to encourage us to think about the nature of knowledge and technology.

And perhaps to advance our efforts beyond vain efforts to proclaim the greatness of the past.

Because any greatness that we will have tomorrow won't be obtained by ignoring Europe and building on Egypt as if the history that followed never happened. That would be doomed to failure.
I disagree, because the point is to...

"...honestly admit that what we think we know about the ancient world is actually very miniscule and much of that has been tainted by intellectual dishonesty, imperialistic designs, religious conservatism and outright racial bigotry..."

The Egyptian Great Year And Christianity
January 08, 2002
by Corey Gilkes

...and as far as I am concerned the Eurocentric mindset is oppressive, degrading and devoid of true spirituality...!
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Fine:
I disagree, because the point is to...

"...honestly admit that what we think we know about the ancient world is actually very miniscule and much of that has been tainted by intellectual dishonesty, imperialistic designs, religious conservatism and outright racial bigotry..."

...and as far as I am concerned the Eurocentric mindset is oppressive, degrading and devoid of true spirituality...!


My point is that we cannot prepare for future greatness by burying our heads so deeply in the past that we cannot adequately cope with, adjust to, and learn from present realities...
IMOHO, it is our collective lack of knowledge and appreciation of our past that has crippled our mental reservoir of greatness.

"...understanding the history of the world and how we, like our ancestors, can traverse backwards and forwards through time in order to access knowledge, is crucial..." -- Corey Gilkes.

"...Without the African connection, we are a disjointed people ...begging for entry into somebody else's house..." -- Dr. John Henrik Clarke, Notes for an African World Revolution Trenton: Africa World Press, 1991, P.418. "

And I Agree...!
Last edited {1}
quote:


GREAT INFO!

Most of the religious world doesn't overstand why Egypt is so prominant in the bible. All of the most important biblical characters at some point went to Egypt. Abraham (Ab-Heart, Ra-Most High God of Egypt, Ham-Hammites, black folk), Josesph, Moses(known as Thutmose in Egypt) and according to scriptures, even Jesus(known as Horus in Egypt) went there for 12 years.

The word Amen, comes from the names of the Ancient Egyptians Gods, Amun,Amon,Atum,Atun,Aten and even Amen. Check out the bible scripture Rev 3:14, heck I'll give it to you. Very interesting, things that make you say hmmmmmmm..........

This is from one of the many versions of the bible, the New King James

Rev 3:14
"And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans[a] write,˜These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:

Notice this scripture doesn't appear to be a prayer and the mention of the word Amen is not ending a prayer. It "appears" to be talking about a group of individuals named the "Amen" watched the creation of GOD, G-Gomer, O-Oz, D-Dabar, Strength, Wisdom and Beauty of man.

Peace and Blessings to all
Ntellect
Atlanta
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:

This is from one of the many versions of the bible, the New King James

Rev 3:14
"And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans[a] write,˜These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:

Notice this scripture doesn't appear to be a prayer and the mention of the word Amen is not ending a prayer. It "appears" to be talking about a group of individuals named the "Amen" watched the creation of GOD, G-Gomer, O-Oz, D-Dabar, Strength, Wisdom and Beauty of man.


Now can we name any other verse in the Bible where this seems to be the case?

That's granting that you're correct about the verse in Revelation. A book which was written in the 1st century AD (centuries after the bulk of the Old Testament) - probably one of the very last books of the Bible to be written. So even if you're correct about this one verse you still haven't accounted for the Biblical origin. The best you've maybe established is that the writer of Revelation was alluding to the Egyptian deity. But how do you justify this reading retroactively on the entire Bible based on one verse in the very last book of the Bible to be written (which is also the most controversial and most difficult to interpret by the way)?? Given that the Bible as a whole was written over a period of more than 1000 years?

Folks, all of this is extremely sloppy scholarship. In fact, as far as I can see, it's mostly wishful thinking.... We're confusing mythology with history.... On several different levels...

And I still haven't figured out: What purpose does it serve?

PS: The word "GOD" is the translation and is not to be found in the original language.
Last edited {1}
HonestBrother, thank you for your opinion and dialogue. It challenges me to dig deep into my mental reservoir of facts that I have studied and researched for a number of years. I'm not here to argue or belittle anyone's belief or opinion. I'm a man of facts and I'm only posting the facts that have been discovered by many and my conclusion to what I feel those facts are.

You brought up some very interesting points and yet have me a little confused on some of the nature of your questions. Please pardon me as this is going to be a little lengthy as I attempt to answer your post in detailed fact and my opinion of those facts.

Where what seems to be the case? Are you referring to scriptures that are "contradictory", scriptures that talk about Egypt or the Gods of Egypt or what? I'd like to be clear on this point before I open that very large can of worms.

The book of Revelations itself has been called "The Revelation of John", "The Revelation of Christ", the "Apocalypse" and much more. Who wrote Revelation and when was it written? Well, interesting enough, no one seems to really know for sure. The author of Revelations simply called himself John, a Roman name that was as common as drinking water. This scripture was supposedly written by this particular John, was written when John was supposedly on the island of Patmos, where he was a prisoner for claiming the Gospel of Christ. Patmos is in the Aegean Sea off the coast of modern day Turkey. There's a lot of speculation and guessing over who really wrote it but within the religious ranks, (Roman-Catholics true indoctrinators of Christianity) it is "believed" to be authored by John Zebedee, the disciple who allegedly walked with Christ. NOTE, that the other disciples that wrote the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke are alleged to have never walked with Christ. They knew him and his teachings but did not walk with Christ and his life, only John did, supposedly. These are not my words but that of historians and theologians that put Christianity together. Also, NOTE that John also is "believed" to be the author of his own book the Epistles of John.

One of the many reason's there's confusion of the authorship of Revelation is due to the time that it is "believed" to have been written. John Zebedee is once again "believed" to have been born around the same time as Christ (4-7 BCE). Ancient fathers of the Catholic Church, one being a man by the name of Irenaeus, wrote that this scripture came to John as a "vision" near the end of Domitian's rule which was about 95 CE. So scholars, theologians and historians have a problem with this because this would have meant that John would have been around 100 years old or older when he wrote it, during a time where the average life age for men was only about 35, although scholars, theologians and historians due "believe" that the disciples lived longer lives than that. Note, it's believed that the average age of death for the disciples was believed to be early 60's. James 62 A.D, Paul 64 A.D and Peter 65 A.D. Now mind you this is a direct result of the allegedly persecution and killing of Christians under Nero.

One of the other major reasons there is so much confusion on validating authorship is the way or style that Revelation is written. Like I said above, John Zebedee is "believed" to be the author of the Epistles of John and Revelation but the writing styles and language are like night and day. The Epistle of John was written in standard understandable Greek and Revelation in what has been termed as "barbarous" Greek. This is controversial in itself because John as well as Jesus and the other disciples, were Jews that spoke and wrote in Hebrew and Aramaic. The interesting fact here is that there is no documentation claiming that John Zebedee ever traveled to Greece or learned Greek. This is when many Christians will say that the Holy Spirit allegedly allowed this to happen as in the book of Acts, when all the disciples spoke in a language unknown to them. The book of Acts, supposedly written by Luke, who did not walk with Christ, was also allegedly written some 55-59 years after all the events and crucifixion of Christ took place

I've never doubted the origin of the bible nor did I mention anything of it in my previous post. Yes the bible "story" does have an origin as does everything. The question is, what is its true origin? People seem to forget that these same biblical stories have been told thousands upon thousands of times and years by different cultures and people since the creation of man. (Which would be millions and not thousands). So the bible in itself is nothing new. Just stories being told from one people's (European) perspective after they basically took over the world and converted everything into their image to accommodate their lifestyles and rule.
Like you claim, Revelation is the last book to be written in the bible (which it actually isn't, it's the last one included in the bible). The Counsel of Nicea authenticated the scriptures they wanted to put in the bible and then some years later King James ordained 46 "religious" men, along with the help of William Shakespeare, to put an English version of the bible together. There are thousands of scriptures and gospels that were intentionally left out of the bible because they contradicted everything they put in the bible. (the Aquarian Gospels, Gnoptic Gospels, Coptic Gospels, the rest of the Apocalyptic Gospels, the Nag Hammadi gospels, the scripture of St. Thomas, the scripture of Judas, etc, etc.) Why would the author of Revelations "possibly" be speaking about Egyptian Deities in the last most controversial book of the bible? Maybe it's because the New Testament was translated from the Greek interpretation of the scriptures. A people who had many God's, who built their existing foundation on what they stole from Egypt. Maybe, whoever the author was, knew something that many people don't know. The FACT of the matter is every time a "Christian" closes a prayer with Amen, they are "unknowingly" giving reverence to an Egyptian Deity.

Please do explain to me my many levels of confusion because it seems you appear to be on the attack and to me you have your facts, opinions, history and mythology all confused yourself. Remember, history (his-story) tells us, the Greeks stole from the "original Egyptians", the Romans stole from the Greeks and the Egyptians. In mythology, both the Greeks and Romans had many "pagan" God's that were copied from the Egyptian Deities but the only proof (history or historical facts) that those entities even existed, are being found till this very day in Egypt. I'm not talking about just tombs of Pharaohs either. Due the research. So if historians and archeologists, "find" what appears to be concrete, historical proof and facts, I don't "believe" its mythology anymore, unless, the definition of mythology has changed over night.

You quoted "And I still haven't figured out: What purpose does it serve?" Please be more specific. What purpose does what serve?

You also quoted "PS: The word "GOD" is the translation and is not to be found in the original language."

BINGO! JACKPOT! You are absolutely correct. The word "GOD" is a translation that is not found in the original language(s). BUT, what language are YOU referring to as the original language? So what was it translated from? All the other languages mention a specific name for GOD except English, a language that isn't an original language and is comprised of other languages, mainly Greek and Latin. You are right on point with this observation, whether you meant it that way or not. Language is the deception my friend.

Peace and Blessings to all,
Ntellect
Atlanta, Ga
quote:
Originally posted by Melesi:
divinejoy,

First, the second website that fine points us to doesn't always know what it's talking about:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The fact that "Amen" came from Jewish sources into Christianity is acknowledged in the Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 1 1907

"The word Amen is one of a small number of Hebrew words which have been imported unchanged into the liturgy of the Church ... 'So frequent was this Hebrew word in the mouth of Our Saviour', observes the catechism of the Council of Trent, "that it pleased the Holy Ghost to have it perpetuated in the Church of God."

It is ironical that the Holy Ghost (spiritual form of God) would ask to implement something after hearing it from The Saviour (Jesus Christ)!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Do you see anything in the Catholic Encyclopedia quote saying that teh Holy Spirit "asks" anything? How did that fellow read that into it?

Very sloppy scholarship.

Nothing like a false etymology to confirm a bias, right?

In fact, you and Strong's are right. The word "amen" in it's different forms is a quite common Hebrew word:

Esther 2:7 (translated, "brought up" in NIV)
Numbers 11:12 (transl. "carry them")
Ruth 4:16 ("cared for him")
2 Kings 18:16 ("doorposts")
2 Samuel 20:19 ("faithful ones")
Isaiah 22:25 ("firm place")

And a whole host of other places:

1 Chron. 17:24
Isa. 33:16
Jer. 15:18
Ho. 5:2
Dt. 28:59
Isa. 55:3
2 Sam. 7:16
1 Sam. 2:35; 3:20

and so it goes.

It is a common word for making something sure, certain, or secure. As used at the end of a Hebrew prayer, it could mean something like, "Absolutely," or "May it be so."

Pagan deity, indeed.

Fine, when it comes to what might support your biases, you are entirely too credulous.



************
Amen was never a Hebrew word. It was later pulled into Hebrew language. Just the phonetics of the word Amen alone, proves it's not of Hebrew origin. People seem to forget that Egypt existed before any of the biblical references or stories that are told OR documented in the bible. Historians and archeologists prove that Egypt was the first "civilization" of the world, not really but that's what history goes with. Thus, the Egyptian Deities names of Amon, Amun, Atum, Atun, Aten and yes even Amen, existed thounsands of years before it was added as the close of prayer in any religious scriptures. Regardless of what the Hebrews/Jews use it for or how the Hebrew language now defines it, it's origin is Egyptian.

Peace and Blessings to all
Ntellect
Atlanta, Ga
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:
Amen was never a Hebrew word. It was later pulled into Hebrew language. Just the phonetics of the word Amen alone, proves it's not of Hebrew origin. People seem to forget that Egypt existed before any of the biblical references or stories that are told OR documented in the bible. Historians and archeologists prove that Egypt was the first "civilization" of the world, not really but that's what history goes with. Thus, the Egyptian Deities names of Amon, Amun, Atum, Atun, Aten and yes even Amen, existed thounsands of years before it was added as the close of prayer in any religious scriptures. Regardless of what the Hebrews/Jews use it for or how the Hebrew language now defines it, it's origin is Egyptian.


ntellect, in your response to me, you told me a lot of stuff that I already knew or had heard of... My essential point was that finding a (possible) reference to an Egyptian god in the very last book of the Bible does not prove that the word "Amen" is of Egyptian origin nor does it prove that Christians are evoking an Egyptian deity. And it's quite a stretch to use one verse in one of the last written Biblical books to prove something about a word that occurs in other books written centuries before it.

Alls it means is that 2 words sound alike and that (perhaps) the writer of Revelation (whoever he was) made use of this coincidence... and no one on this entire thread has produced any evidence whatsoever that proves otherwise.

What's the point in all this? Meaning what's the point of weaving these elaborate historical fantasies about the past? - especially since , in my opinion, all you've accomplished is showing that perhaps Christian mythology owes a debt to Greek mythology which may owe a debt to Egyptian mythology... But that is the nature of civilizations. They borrow. (And by 'mythology' I just mean stories about gods and goddesses). OK... maybe they all ultimately borrowed from Africa. I don't believe this. But I have no problem with it being true. But still... so what?


Even if your claims about the connections are entirely correct (which I doubt) it's still like saying you're evoking the Norse god "Wotan" every time you say "Wednesday"... Are you really? Or have I just made a big deal out of nothing - just because the two words "Wotan" and "Wednesday" happen to be historically connected? Same with "Thor" and "Thursday"... So we're all REALLY Odin worshippers?...

No. It's an exercise in pointlessness... and no amount of claim making about Egyptian greatness millenia ago is going to make a jots worth of difference to contemporary reality.

As I've already said on this thread proving that your ancient relative invented the wheel is absolutely pointless if you're not building the best bicycle now... and that's not to mention cars and other types of vehicles.

Pointless.

If you're not producing, ENCOURAGING, and SUPPORTING mathematicians, engineers, scientists, architects, artists, philosophers, and theologians, etc. right now - IN THE PRESENT - all this obsession with Egypt - MILLENIA AGO - is pointless.

It might appear I'm on the "attack" but I never understood this obsession. It's insane. Precisely because it doesn't lend itself to producing anything now. It's stuck in the distant past. A form of escapism. Because it seems to avoid the present.

I'm not so much attacking... It's just that I'm FOR being productive now... and I'm sick of seeing us drain our energies into pointless pursuits... And IMO we do waste tons of energy on pointless pursuits.

As a people, we'd rather fund/support 10 preachers (as if we needed more) than 1 architect...

And in place of support, we talk about how great Egypt was 5000 years ago.

Fundamentally counterproductive IMO...
Last edited {1}
HonestBrother, you have every right to your opinion about this being pointless but to others, it's of ultimate importance. You say the word "Amen" is possibly not of Egyptian origin. Like I said, I'm a man of facts. Just show me when and where it was used before Egypt and I'll accept it. I couldn't begin to give you every scripture in the bible that pays homage to Egyptian Deities because there are so many but I could probably give you a good 20 off the top of the dome, if you would like. The entire biblical accounts come from the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Enuma Elish and the Gilgamesh Epics and others. All of which I have read and researched. All of these predate any biblical scriptures by thousands of years. This has nothing to do with a word or two sounding alike.

So like I said, the biblical stories are just stories being re-told but the great people who performed all of this originally, was basically erased and another people put in their place.

You say Mary, Jesus and the virgin birth, I say Isis, Horus and the virgin birth. Foundation is the same other than Isis/Horus according to archeologists and historians, happenned 10,000 years before the biblical stories. Oh, and the people were different, the place was different, the names were different, etc.

When did exposing the truth become a burden of holding on to the past? You have to know your true past so that you recognize your true greatness and potential. Can't ever want to become a God again, if you never knew you were one. John 10:34, Psalms 82:6

In my opinion, you can produce better when you know the truth.

You say why the obsession with Egypt? Well, ask all the governments that spend billions of dollars every year digging up the graves and researching in Egypt. They know the truth but the average person doesn't and they'll do whatever they have to, to discredit it's true, original source.

Man, Egypt is in and around everything that we do and say. Just look around brother. From the all seeing eye of the Egyptian Sun God RA and pyramid on the back of your dollar bill,the way we build houses, the design and layout of the white house, washington monument designed by (Benjamin Banniker/African Moor/Egyptian Mason based upon a star system like the Giza Pyramids), worshipping on sun-day, Eastern Star and Mason oraganizations, to ending your prayers with Amen, it's always been about Egypt, the powers that be just don't want us to see it. We can deny it all we want and say it's all conspiracy but it's only a conspiracy if there's no proof to prove it. The proof is in the pudding all around us.

peace and blessings to all,
Ntellect
Atlanta
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:
HonestBrother, you have every right to your opinion about this being pointless but to others, it's of ultimate importance. You say the word "Amen" is possibly not of Egyptian origin. Like I said, I'm a man of facts. Just show me when and where it was used before Egypt and I'll accept it.


ntellect, read the thread. I won't rehash so many things that have already been said.

But just because a word in one language looks (when transliterated into a 3rd language) superficially like a word in another language (i.e., they're spelled or sound alike) DOES NOT MEAN they're the same word or even related. It's perfectly possible for it to be sheer coincidence. Many examples were produced earlier in this thread.

Anyone who has actually studied several languages in depth knows that this can happen.

quote:

I couldn't begin to give you every scripture in the bible that pays homage to Egyptian Deities because there are so many but I could probably give you a good 20 off the top of the dome, if you would like.


How about one? Just one? And we are talking specifically about Amen where the actual word 'Amen' is used ... Frown

quote:

The entire biblical accounts come from the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Enuma Elish and the Gilgamesh Epics and others. All of which I have read and researched. All of these predate any biblical scriptures by thousands of years.


"Entire" is a pretty strong word. I'm familiar with some of the sources for Biblical material that you name. I don't deny that many Biblical stories are based on earlier predecessors. And that there are also striking similarities with other traditions. But one finds that there are striking similarities among mythological systems found around the globe. For example the Buddha also had an unusual birth - he was born from his mother's side. And buddhism is an older religion. What does that mean? Some have suggested that Jesus had been exposed to eastern thought. You also find a Trinity in Hindu thought: Brahma, Shiva, and Vishnu.... So does that mean the Christian Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) derived from India?

quote:

When did exposing the truth become a burden of holding on to the past? You have to know your true past so that you recognize your true greatness and potential. Can't ever want to become a God again, if you never knew you were one. John 10:34, Psalms 82:6


All mythology... and for the rest, see below.

quote:

In my opinion, you can produce better when you know the truth.


Then, dammit, where are all the (black) people who are using these 'truths' to produce better?

As you say, the proof is in the pudding.
Last edited {1}
Hey HB, don't forget about the Hindu God Krishna (as in Christ or Kristian/Christian), which also was combined with the ancient Egyptian word Karest, which means anointed, he was also a son of God who was crucified for the people. Have you ever seen a picture of Krishna? Look it up on the web. Pretty interesting that the picture that the Hindu created of Krishna, looks exactly like the picture that Micheal Angelo (Michael God's Angel, in Greek the word Angelos means angel) drew of Jesus. Only difference is that, whether it was symbolically or literally, Krishna was estimated to be at least 6000 years before Christ.

As far as the scriptures relating to Amen, there's only that one that specifically uses the word Amen but there are a tone of others that give honor and glory to the Sun God Amon/Atun/Amun which are all derivatives of Amen without using the actual name but seeing that you are not an Egyptologist, you probably wouldn't see it that way. Especially seeing that you want to continue saying that all of this stuff on Egypt is mythology, although they are finding concrete proof every day in Egypt of the Egyptian Deities being actual living breathing beings and they are still digging. Smile Funny thing about the word mythology, it's defined and created by the same individuals who pretty much control everything, including religion. I guess it's always a myth when some dumba$$ can't figure it out. LOL

As far as the "black" people who are attempting to use these truths to produce better. First off, it's not just "black" people who are starting to expose the truth. You don't see them in the fore-front because they would be persecuted just like all the prophets, messiah's, etc are. It doesn't fit into mainstream thinking. Even the truth is not for all my brother because many of us are so stuck in our way of thinking due to brain washing, most of us would reject the truth anyway and most of the rest wouldn't even recognize the truth. Funny thing about finding out the ugly truth, it puts one in an uncomfortable position, makes them an outcast and most of us don't want to exist like that. Most would rather fit in and be accepted and liked by the masses. I am one, who doesn't mind being an outcast because I truly think outside of the little box they want us to stay in. The other thing about that seems to be consistent about the truth is, it rarely finds you. You have to seek it.

The truth does not make one free or set one free, until you apply it to your life.

Peace and Blessings to all
Ntellect
Atlanta
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:

As far as the scriptures relating to Amen, there's only that one that specifically uses the word Amen but there are a tone of others that give honor and glory to the Sun God Amon/Atun/Amun which are all derivatives of Amen without using the actual name but seeing that you are not an Egyptologist, you probably wouldn't see it that way. Especially seeing that you want to continue saying that all of this stuff on Egypt is mythology, although they are finding concrete proof every day in Egypt of the Egyptian Deities being actual living breathing beings and they are still digging. Smile


PRODUCE JUST ONE SCRIPTURE!

I keep asking for just one.

Instead of citing some vague 'scholar' or 'archaeologist' or 'they' for God's goddamned sake, be specific and cite just one. Puhlease...

One more:


The English word "amain": Is it the same as 'amen'?

They look very similar... they sound alike... are they the same?
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:

As far as the scriptures relating to Amen, there's only that one that specifically uses the word Amen but there are a tone of others that give honor and glory to the Sun God Amon/Atun/Amun which are all derivatives of Amen without using the actual name but seeing that you are not an Egyptologist, you probably wouldn't see it that way. Especially seeing that you want to continue saying that all of this stuff on Egypt is mythology, although they are finding concrete proof every day in Egypt of the Egyptian Deities being actual living breathing beings and they are still digging. Smile


PRODUCE JUST ONE SCRIPTURE!

I keep asking for just one.

Instead citing some vague 'scholar' or 'archaeologist' or 'they' for God's goddamned sake, be specific and cite just one. Puhlease...

One more:


The English word "amain": Is it the same as 'amen'?

They look very similar... they sound alike... are they the same?


Hey HB, slow your roll. You know better than to use God's name in vain. "Goddamned." RLOL

You didn't address any of the things that I just posted but it's aiiight. Tell, you what. I'm actually in the middle of a move and migration of all our IT systems here at work. I will make my best effort to get these scriptures to you on this post by Friday.

Until then, Hotep. Oh, my bad, you're not an Egyptologist. So I should say peace.

Ntellect
Atlanta
quote:
Originally posted by ntellect:
Hey HB, don't forget about the Hindu God Krishna (as in Christ or Kristian/Christian), which also was combined with the ancient Egyptian word Karest, which means anointed, he was also a son of God who was crucified for the people. Have you ever seen a picture of Krishna? Look it up on the web. Pretty interesting that the picture that the Hindu created of Krishna, looks exactly like the picture that Micheal Angelo (Michael God's Angel, in Greek the word Angelos means angel) drew of Jesus. Only difference is that, whether it was symbolically or literally, Krishna was estimated to be at least 6000 years before Christ.

Eek
I take it that you did not read through the thread before commenting.

Also, you offer a gross mischaracterization of Krishna (timeline, nature, mission, etc). Try Krishna for a quick overview.
Last edited {1}

Add Reply

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