The Lost House of Israel - Page 3

East_African · (#51 (**permalink**))

Thoth B3 wrote:

Quote:

@East African

Assuming that the Abaraham, Sarah, Hagar, and Ishmael story is correct, I would whole-heartedly agree with much of your analysis. However, I think it is rather naive to believe that story to begin with. You say, as the Bible says, that Abraham and Sarah were given an Egyptian slave-girl...an Egyptian slave??? Can you really believe this? Who in the world back then could possibly take them as slaves? There is full account of them taking others who tried to invade them as slaves, but hardly the other way around. And then to take an Egyptian woman? That was even more rare because Egyptians wouldn't even let their women marry non-Egyptians let alone be in a position to have them taken into bondage.

Quote:

Firstly let me stress that muslims do not believe that Hagar was a slave we believe that she was a wife of Abraham even the christians on this board who have refuted what i have said are discrediting their own bible for it says:

Quote:

And Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her handmaid, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to Abram her husband to be his wife. Genesis 16:3

Quote:

Know am going slightly going of the topic i would like christians to explain how the child of hagar was illigitimate if it clearly states that hagar was to become his wife?

Quote:

To answer your point toth tradition has it that the king of egypt gave his daughter to abraham as a gift although you may not believe this for obvious reasons. She was to help sarah around the house and assist her. However this is completely different from a slave like i said befoe this story has clearly been taken out of context and mistranslated in order to decieve people into thinking the seed of hagar was illigitimate! Like you said it is highly unlikely that an egyptian women would taken as a slave by israelites.

Quote:

LadyDay · (#52 (**permalink**))

@east african start a new thread on hagar if you wish to discuss merits on her status

otherwise get back to topicniceone.gif

East_African · (#53 (**permalink**))

LadyDay wrote:

Quote:

@east african start a new thread on hagar if you wish to discuss merits on her status

otherwise get back to topicniceone.gif

Quote:

Fair enough but this story in the bible exactly demonstrates that the egyptians where a black african people where as the israelites where not. In this part of the world the people who being enslaved where mostly fair skinned people. So that means if the israelites where african then the egyptians where enslaving other africans. I will use the story of Joseph in the bible to further illustrate my point.

Quote:

Judah said to his brothers, "What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? 27 Come, let's sell him to the Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him; after all, he is our brother, our own flesh and blood." His brothers agreed.

28 So when the Midianite merchants came by, his brothers pulled Joseph up out of the cistern and sold him for twenty shekels [suP][a][/suP] of silver to the Ishmaelites, who took him to Egypt.

look at the words i have highlighted in particular these are all clearly different people in different regions in the middle east/africa. we also know that the 12 tribes of the israelites descend from jacob the son of isaac. It is also clear that the israelites are making frequent journeys to egypt and they where of a semitic stock. Once again i will ask if the israelites where indeed black then what country did they come from? Because they where clearly not from Egypt, Cush or Abbsynia.

Shemsi en Tehuti · (#54 (**permalink**))

East_African wrote:

Quote:

To answer your point toth tradition has it that the king of egypt gave his daughter to abraham as a gift although you may not believe this for obvious reasons. She was to help sarah around the house and assist her. However this is completely different from a slave like i said befoe this story has clearly been taken out of context and mistranslated in order to decieve people into thinking the seed of hagar was illigitimate! Like you said it is highly unlikely that an egyptian women would taken as a slave by israelites.

Quote:

============================

Quote:

Take a look at theAmarna tablets, which were letters from West Asian Semitic/Arabic/Indo-European countries written to 18th & 19th Dynasty Egyptian kings. It is clear that Egypt never gave away any women, especially not the daughter of a Pharaoh because his daughters ensured that his bloodline of nobility would continue through his children. Kemet was matrilineal/matriarchal.

Quote:

The closest thing to that in history was when King Tut was assassinated and his wife, AnkhSempa-Amen.tried to make a treaty with the Hittites given they were a formidible threat. This treaty entailed giving herself in marriage to a Hittite prince. The prince was killed, and she was deposed as a legitimate ruler of Kemet by Horemheb (the last ruler of the 18th Dynasty).

Shemsi en Tehuti · (#55 (**permalink**))

East_African wrote:

Quote:

LadyDay wrote:

Quote:

@east african start a new thread on hagar if you wish to discuss merits on her status

otherwise get back to topicniceone.gif

Quote:

Fair enough but this story in the bible exactly demonstrates that the egyptians where a black african people where as the israelites where not. In this part of the world the people who being enslaved where mostly fair skinned people. So that means if the israelites where african then the egyptians where enslaving other africans. I will use the story of Joseph in the bible to further illustrate my point.

Quote:

Judah said to his brothers, "What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? 27 Come, let's sell him to the Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him; after all, he is our brother, our own flesh and blood." His brothers agreed.

28 So when the Midianite merchants came by, his brothers pulled Joseph up out of the cistern and sold him for twenty shekels [suP][a][/suP] of silver to the Ishmaelites, who took him to Egypt.

look at the words i have highlighted in particular these are all clearly different people in different regions in the middle east/africa. we also know that the 12 tribes of the israelites descend from jacob the son of isaac. It is also clear that the israelites are making frequent journeys to egypt and they where of a semitic stock. Once again i will ask if the israelites where indeed black then what country did they come from? Because they where clearly not from Egypt, Cush or Abbsynia.

Quote:

============================

Quote:

I agree with you that the Israelites obviously were not Africans, but Egypt did have other Africans as slaves. The more accurate term I feel is "prisoners of war" though. Egypt had a strong alliance for thousands of years with Kush/Absynnia; however, there were certain tribes in what was later termed "Nubia" that the Egyptians utterly despised and were sometimes at constant war.

Weapon of Israel · (#56 (**permalink**))

The person who appears to be a rebel linked numbers 12, with psalms 51....... (Only a rebel would do some madness like this) Numbers 12 speaks of Miriam recieving a PLAGUE called Leprosy. Psalms 51, is speaking about David purging his skin. Its two completely different topics. One has nothing to do with the other. You cannot use that to prove or disprove anything. Leviticus 13:10-12 describes the PLAGUE as a whiteness spreading in the skin. Not repentance. I just had to mention that...that was CRAZY.

And Job 30:30 doesn't say because of his affliction. It says his skin is black.

And as far as those other revised versions of the Bible, it proves nothing. The so-called whiteman tried to remove and tamprer with all of the scriptuers that tell you that the jews are balck. (but there are more scriptures than he knows about....lol)

Justavoice · (#57 (**permalink**))

HLF wrote:

Quote:

In the proper Hebrew rendering, it would read like so, I am Black, and comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar,as the curtains of Solomon.
Some may not know whatwas meant, but there are context clues in the same passage. In this passage, comely is a nonessential element. So with the removal of it, the passage reads as such: "I am Black O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar,as the curtains of Solomon." In this form it shows in direct comparison (not contrast) the beauty of blackness to the goat-haired tents of Kedar and the linen curtains in Solomon's temple, which it was originally meant to express just likein the New Revised Standard Version of the Hebrew Bible.

[align=left]The rest: 6Do not gaze at me because I am dark,
because the sun has gazed on me.
My mother's sons were angry with me;
they made me keeper of the vineyards,
but my own vineyard I have not kept!
[/align]

[align=left]Vineyard by definition is, "a sphere of activity : field of endeavor". [/align]

[align=left]I have realized nowthat thissong is not aboutone man and woman, it is allegoric forIsrael(bride) and their God(bridegroom) as spoken in Jeremiah 2:2. Does not her brothers scorn herin humiliation (and secret jealousy) of her (Israel's) physicalblackness and her spiritual state of blackness (not having knowledge of her God)?At the same time Israel has been "keepers of vineyards" (i.e. slaves) working for her brothers for ages, but havenot kept her own vineyard, which was to worship and keep their God's laws and statues. It makes sense, because how could Israelnot be dark if they didn't work inthe vineyard fields physically, symbolically as well as spiritually (serving other gods)?It makes a lot of sense of verse7: "Tell me, you whom my soul loves, where you pasture your flock,where you make it lie down at noon;"[/align]

[align=left]----------[/align]
[align=left]What HLF wrote is kind of what i am getting at. I believe the Israelites were a black people. I am not saying they were Africans. Also someone pointed out to me that Hebrew and Jew are European terms, and yes i do know this. However in the same vain "Africa" or "African" is also a european name given to a people.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]My argument is that what was going on in those days and on that continent was all Black. Lets not decieve ourselves either, African enslaved Africans, tribal wars were common. You have in scripture the King of Judah having an Alliance with a Pharoah and going out to war.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]So in one hand during the long history Israel found itself enslaved by Egypt and fighting alongside Egypt at other times. Abraham went to Egypt but he was no slave and met Pharoah, so did Jacob, he was no slave.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]So I think that some of us on here is looking at the politics of the world back then through the eyes of modern day racial politics now.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Israel may not have been African but I believe that they were a black people who could not be distinguished apart from Egyptians of that time.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Jesus said that he as come for the lost house of Israel. And this is what interests me. For his Job is two fold. Jesus as come to be a light unto the Gentiles and to bring again the Lost house of Israel. And this is what interests me. Black peoples are being called by the Spirit and to me in line with prophecy for God said he would no longer call them out of Egypt but from amongst the nations and out of the north. This i believe will be done and is being done via the work of the Holy Ghost. The scattered people are returning. [/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Another myth, is that black people are gentiles.. read Genesis and what makes up the Isles of the Gentiles is not Africa or Israel.. It is Europe. [/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]It is Europe that did not know of God nor were enlightened and so the light which sprung up unto the Gentiles, for the bible says "Them that sat in darkness have seen a great light".[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Who was sitting in darkness ?[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]It wasn't us - black people... It wasn't Africa, for the Pharoah's of Africa moved alongside the Israelites. Escaped famine because according to Joseph in the bible the dream which the Pharoah had was from God. So this Pharoah had knowledge of the one true God.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Then you had the Queen of Sheba, travelling across Africa to enquire of the wisdom of Solomon, who sent her back having made alliance with her. [/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]So I ask was Africa in darkness concerning the one true God ? I don't think so.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]What I understand is that when the Apostle Paul reached the Shores of Malta, he said he encountered babarbarians. [/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Paul who travelled to Arabia, who travelled to Israel and in so doing must have passed through Africa. Yet in his writing he does not say of those people they were barbarians. However Paul got to Spain and found a people locked off from th rest world as he knew it.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]That is my take on it. So yes I do believe that there could be a good many black people scattered around the earth that are Israelites and don't know it.[/align]
[align=left][/align]

LadyDay · (#58 (**permalink**))

justavoice........just wondering how and where do you do you research?

is it al scripture or spirit lead? if so elaborate

Shemsi en Tehuti · (#59 (**permalink**))

@ Justavoice

I am just curious what you take from this scripture (Lamentations 4:7-8 NIV):

[suP]7[/suP] Their princes were brighter than snow and whiter than milk,their bodies more ruddy than rubies,their appearance like sapphires.

[suP]8[/suP] But now they are blacker than soot;they are not recognized in the streets. Their skin has shriveled on their bones;it has become as dry as a stick.

I just want to know if you are getting the same thing out of this scripture that I am. It seems that in prominence, they are portrayed with rosy-white skin, yet in desolation they have become black.

ModernMarvel · (#60 (**permalink**))

Lamentations 4:7Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, ...

For those who truly want the understanding behind that verse, it's telling you how beautiful the Nazarites were before they went into captivity. The precepts "purer than snow" and "whiter than milk" are referring to their righteousness, whilst "they were more ruddy in body than rubies" is talking abouttheir beauty. This is proven by the next precept in the same verse, where it says:

... their polishing was of sapphire:

When you go to the second verse it said this about Israel:

Lamentations 4:2The precious sons of Zion, comparable to fine gold

You can see how the Lord compared them to fine gold here, so that reference to their beauty is brought up again in the 7th verse, in the relevant precept. Now the next verse proves that the 7th verse wasn't talking about skin colour.

Lamentations 4:8Their visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets: their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered, it is become like a stick.

And if that wasn't enough, there's this verse:

Lamentations 5:10Our skin was black like an oven because of the terriblefamine.

For someone's skin tone to get like that under the conditions mentioned above, they'd have to already be dark-skinned. At no point in history have so-called white people'sskinturned black under such conditions (certain events during WW2 should tell you that clearly), so this verse talking about what the Israelites went through could never have applied to them, but only to a people that's already dark-skinned. Which goes right back to the posts