Africa, Bible the untold truth

I agree but the thing that hurts the most is that African Americans refuse not all to see the truth right in front of their eyes. Even with all the information out there we still walk around with our eyes close. Truthfully I don't blame white people. I blame us for getting fat and lazy after Martin Luther King Jr. pass and this doesn't mean everyone but I can say my parents and family didn't me my history like I'm teaching my son

Originally posted by JanusRook I would like to thank everyone for their response to what I have provided. I have used various sources whom which I agree and make no claim to their insight. This is my first forum and wanted to get some feed back on my thoughts. I will provide a list of the books and websites I have read and referenced to show that I have not in anyway tried to still anyone's work: Hopefully we helped you out a bit joeamonroe. None of us were saying you were plagiarizing it's just when you list theories that haven't gained mainstream acceptance and don't list where you got them from anyone can come across as a bit of a crackpot. I'd also like to point out to Janus that the Hebrews had not thoroughly adopted Monotheism by the time of Moses Yes, but they were under no Monotheistic restrictions until Moses. The Covenant with Abraham was that Abraham and his family would hold God above all other gods. It was not until Moses that the Lord said "You shall not have any other gods before me." Meaning that the Israelites kept being punished for refusing to obey this commandments. Also keep in mind that the Hebrews weren't all "one" people at the time of the Exodus. They were an amalgamation of many different semitic peoples who traced their descent through Abraham. Thus they each had different cultures that were slowly uniting into a Israelite identity.

This statement from the Commandments has always intrigued. By implication, he could be stating that, "Yes, there are other Gods, but I'm head-honcho for Israel; forget those other guys." Therein, the implication is that God is just one of many Gods inhabiting the Celestial regions; it does not necessarily imply Monotheism, which is not only the belief IN one God, but the belief that there IS only one God. The Commandment does not lend itself well to the Monotheistic case.  That said, there are many Monotheism references in later elements of the Old Testament, but that statement in particular always caught my eye.

Originally posted by JanusRook There were never any Jews in Egypt. The old testament is a story, it's not actually true and the whole Moses, Ramases, leading the people out of Egypt thing just mythology. Well actually IIRC there is an inscription in an egyptian tomb of the period that lists under known neighboring nations a "wandering people"  that coincides with the Exodus of the Bible. A few archaeologists have concluded that these people may be the Hebrews under Moses.

I don't know why anyone would be surprised that the Egyptians in Moses' time don't come off looking very good. From the Bible's perspective, they have the wrong religion. The Bible is a religious text and an exponent of monotheism. Thus its monotheism is regularly put in contrast to competing religious groups within Judaism/Christianity and without. The Egyptians suffer plagues designed to belittle specific characters in their pantheon (example: the plague of darkness undermines the power of Ra, sun god). The Philistines are in an almost constant state of war with Israel. The Jews in captivity in Babylon find ways to show up Babylonian "idolatry." Alexander the Great is remarkably similar to descriptions of the Antichrist. The Romans go ahead and execute the Son of God simply to maintain their authority over the corrupt Jewish puppet state. Ironically it's the Jews themselves who get it the worst- every time a Biblical personage turns away from God something bad seems to happen to them. The Bible is religion-centric, not race-centric. 

Originally posted by Akolouthos Nice, thourough critique, Janus.   I would note that the origin of all of the Gospels -- if not their authorship -- can be ascribed to Jesus' contempraries.   -Akolouthos

I wouldn't go stating that as fact, there's still plenty of debate surrounding that issue.

Cheers to Janus; that critique masterful, sir.

I also heartily agree with Longshanks, however. In order to be an objective Biblical scholar, the Book must be taken with a grain of salt. When people start distributing a basket of bread and anchovies and are able to feed 500 people, the reader ought to suspect something fisky is going on with the "history" presented therein. That said, there are some wonderful books on Biblical history out there.

I'd also like to point out to Janus that the Hebrews had not thoroughly adopted Monotheism by the time of Moses; why in the whole Old Testament do the Israelites keep getting punished by God for their pagan and Canaanite beliefs if they are such "Monotheists?" Kudos as per Akhenaten, by the way.

I had a few ideas and wanted some feed back and direction to better understand faith, religion and history. I was unable to find that with my friends so I sort out a way to post some thoughts and get feed back in a way that would make me a better person. These are only ideas or feelings I have had and wanted to explore whether or not what I thought was really true  and how to go about finding the truth or close to it. thanks again for your response and I will do a better job to make things clear the next time around

You are right, this is my forum and I have provided a response at the bottom of the page

The bible is like tequila

There were never any Jews in Egypt. The old testament is a story, it's not actually true and the whole Moses, Ramases, leading the people out of Egypt thing just mythology.

Well actually IIRC there is an inscription in an egyptian tomb of the period that lists under known neighboring nations a "wandering people"  that coincides with the Exodus of the Bible. A few archaeologists have concluded that these people may be the Hebrews under Moses.

1- Well, for one thing, I was not aware that he was crucified more than once.

According to traditional belief the Crucifixion is a timeless event, thus Christ is always in a state of Crucifixion, at least spiritually.

2- Although none of the Gospels were written by contemporaries of Jesus,

The Gospel of John could argue that point.

You need to provide the source for that text. Otherwise, it constitutes plagiarism under the CoC.

I believe the OP wrote this as an original document. I will caution joeamonroe that if he wants this to be viewed as a scholarly paper you must use proper citations for your assertions (i.e. the information you used to come up with your theory). Otherwise it's just a rant with no weight behind it.

How can you not say that the people of Egypt didn�t already have a great system in place for thousands of years before Christian even started?

They did have a great religious system in place, I don't think many people would argue this, they also existed for a couple of thousand years before Christianity, and ultimately faded into oblivion.

In brief Ancient Egyptians had developed a very complex religion system called Mysteries which was also the first system of salvation.

I doubt that they were the first as the Ancient Egyptians existed long after earlier civilizations like Sumer, Shang, and Indus Valley. Also the first recognized city Catal Huyuk seems to have had pretty vibrant religious beliefs based on the afterlife.

For those who don�t know Washington DC is of Egyptian design. Knights Templar, Masonic lodges all over the world (Whites - George Washington and Blacks � Prince Hall), and various other orders all follow Egyptian teaching.

Masons follow Egyptian teaching in the same way that Wiccans follow Druidic teaching. That being in a completely reconstructed manner created by the founders of the philosophy who never experienced the base culture themselves and mostly used any source no matter how incorrect to create the philosophy.

All of the founding fathers where masons.

Not true, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton and John Hancock have never been officially recognized as Masons.

Throughout history and even in the bible Africans have been betrayed in a negative light starting with the Jews.

Ever heard of Simon of Cyrene an African who bore Jesus cross at the crucifixion, hardly a negative light. Also the Ethiopian treasurer listed in Acts chapter 8 is treated in a very positive light as an eager convert to Christianity. And in Acts 13:1 an Africans are classified as "teachers and prophets" of the church gathered at Antioch, again not negative.

Know answer this question if the Egyptian�s hated the Jews then why GOD would send there savior to the one place that hated them as well.

I have never known anyone to have made the assertion that Ancient Egyptians hated jews. BTW, God sent Joseph and Mary with the young Jesus into "Egypt" (most probably somewhere near Gaza) because it was a fulfillment of scripture that would mark Jesus as the messiah.

Also to throw salt on the wound why has Jesus life in Egypt been omitted out of the bible?

It has? See Matthew 2:14-21. Why would the first 5 or 6 years (at most) of Jesus' life be even IN the Bible. The Bible is not an autobiography of Jesus of Nazareth. It is a book of divine teachings, and only the portions of Jesus' life that pertain to his ministry are in the book. It's the same reason we don't hear of the years he spent in Palestine from about 13-30 years old, he didn't do anything out of the ordinary during that time.

Lastly no one can explain why Jesus was first crucified in Egypt Rev 11:8

Then allow me to explain to you:

" Their corpses will lie in the main street of the great city, 7 which has the symbolic names "Sodom" and "Egypt," where indeed their Lord was crucified." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The great city: this expression is used constantly in Rev for Babylon, i.e., Rome; cf Rev 14:8; 16:19; 17:18; 18:2, 10, 21. "Sodom" and "Egypt": symbols of immorality (cf Isaiah 1:10) and oppression of God's people (cf Exodus 1:11-14). Where indeed their Lord was crucified: not the geographical but the symbolic Jerusalem that rejects God and his witnesses, i.e., Rome, called Babylon in Rev 16-18; see the note on Rev 17:9 and Introduction.

The only way to really understand a point of view is to first evaluate as many perspectives as possible to effectively provide an acceptation point of view.

Agreed and a very mature viewpoint.

Let�s look at this from a different perspective Christian is based out of the middle-east off spring of the Judaism faith, which is the oldest surviving monotheistic religion.

True but it wasn't the oldest monotheistic religion, ironically enough that title belongs to the faith of an Egyptian pharoah, Akhenaten the father of Tutenkhamun, who proclaimed the belief in the Sun-God Aten. At this time the Jewish faith was not yet purely Monotheistic, that would occur later with Moses.

That never came true in the bible because the people never wanted to follow direction but for some reason thanks to the holocaust we could now make what was written come true. Why of all the places in the world was the Jews put them in the Middle East.

That section of the Bible was never meant as a prophecy, rather it was an instruction on how to conduct their rule in a Godly fashion. That is a perfect vision, and as we all know perfection is difficult to come by.

History lesson: Jews have been leaving in the Middle East and all over the world for years and never had any problems until due to US and European influence they decided to move all the Jews to the Middle East. Once this was known to all the people of the Middle East they told the world that this would be a war like no other until the end of days, so far they have been true to their word.

I would have to disagree with this, no problems? Um....Holocaust? Pogroms? Ghettos? The jews have had a lot of problems since the roman era. Also the Jews NEVER left the Middle East, they may have lost their monopoly on the region but they have always had a presence, I mean Jerusalem has always had a jewish quarter for a reason.

Also Zionism was not a product of the US or European thought rather Zionism started as a purely Jewish idea in the growing era of the creation of nation-states in europe, the Jewish leaders thought that they too should have their own home in their original homeland of Palestine. Even after World War II the creation of Israel was aided by Churchill's own zionistic views based on the Balfour Declaration. So if you could say anything it was just Britain who created Israel in the midst of subjugated Arab peoples.

Now for some general feedback. I as a reader am unsure at what the main goal of your paper is? This seems more like three independent papers meshed into one with very flimsy connections between the three.

The first part is trying to explain a perceived anti-Egyptian bias in Christianity, and how that is hypocritical to what the Bible actually teaches. Personally I wouldn't find much merit in such a paper (as my responses list) but it could be interesting if well researched.

The second part seems to be an editorial on how the abrahamic religions (mostly christianity and judaism it seems) have limited the concept of God by the manner of their preachings. You attempt to use logic to explain your position but I feel you could have done in it in a more concise and clear manner, which would better extrapolate on your assertions.

The third part seems to be an anti-Zionist (but not necessarily anti-semetic) paper that expresses confusion over the creation and continued support of the nation of Israel in the face of world politics. I personally believe that this wouldn't make a good paper, as your chosen topics on the issue have been rehashed many times before, and express a view that is pretty well established amongst academics. Also I believe your choice in Biblical quotes to base this assertion on is a bit wanting, I'm certain you can find a better one to explain your opinion.

All in all it starts out interesting but leaves me wanting at the end. If I were you I would go about the first and second parts and go into more detail. While leaving the third part out entirely. Also I would definitely recommend you cite (or re-discover) your sources so that others can follow up on your papers.

Originally posted by joeamonroe Lastly no one can explain why Jesus was first crucified in Egypt Rev 11:8

I'm sure there are many other statements that will stick out to other forummers, but this one stood out to me particularly, and having only a limited time to reply, this will be the focus of initial response (lousy classes...)

1- Well, for one thing, I was not aware that he was crucified more than once. Either this Christ fellow was one tough nutter to be able to take more than one crucifixion, which seems unlikely.

2- Although none of the Gospels were written by contemporaries of Jesus, IIRC, Revelations was an even later Canonical text... so if the highlighted first implies chronology of authorship, that point is also unlikely.

More than likely, he was crucified only once, in Palestine, at the (wash'ed) hands of Pontius Pilate... not once, or even twice, in Egypt, where a) there was not a sizable Jewish population amongst whom to proselytize, and b) he is not  recorded as having traveled to. Why extradite a criminal to a foreign land for the purpose of trying and executing them? Criminals in New York are not extradited to Florida for trial, why send a fellow from Palestine (Judea) to Egypt?