Saturday, July 30, 2011

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 1/13)

An astoundingly mind-shattering documentary.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

The Bible: History or Myth?

The Bible: History or Myth?
by Jeffrey Small, Author of The Breath of God

When you hear the word "myth" associated with the Bible, what is the first thought that comes to your mind?

Many use the term myth in a pejorative sense to mean that the stories described are not factually true. Others define myth as non-historical tales that contain a moral message. Both of these definitions miss the richness of the term. Mythology is a form of literature that expresses fundamental truths in a way that ordinary discourse is inadequate to describe. The stories that make up the myths are often anchored in some historical reality, but this need not be so. Mythology adds a richness of detail and a concreteness to metaphorical language. Reading Biblical stories as mythology gives me the freedom to understand their underlying meaning in a way I never did when I was taught as a child that these stories were factually true.

Why do most modern scholars reject a reading of the Bible as history much less as literal fact?

1. In an age of science and technology, too much of the Bible is simply unbelievable to today's mind and turns people away from the underlying messages. From a scientific standpoint, many of the "facts" in the Bible are simply wrong. One of many examples: according to Genesis, the universe is just over 6000 years old. According to physics, the Big Bang occurred 13.7 billion years ago.

2. Many of the stories are also scientifically impossible, like the tale of Joshua stopping the sun moving across the sky. This story assumes (as was the thinking then) that the earth was flat and was at the center of the universe. We simply know this to be false. Second, for the sun to stop would mean that the earth would have to cease rotating on its axis -- an event which would destroy the planet.

3. For many of the miracle stories, natural explanations exist. The authors of these stories lived in an age when people believed that solar eclipses were divine omens, disease was divine punishment, and mental illness was caused by demon possession. In the case of Jesus, healing was an important part of his ministry. However, today we can find faith healers in Haiti who practice voodoo and in tribal Africa who practice witchcraft. Many of these modern-day faith healers have patients who are actually healed by these practices. Doctors call this the placebo effect, an effect so powerful that drugs must undergo double blind experiments.

4. Some of the mythological stories in the Bible are not original, but were borrowed from other traditions. The Epic of Gilgamesh -- a Sumerian poem detailing the creation of the universe that predates the writings of Genesis by many centuries -- contains a flood story whose plot points are almost identical to the story of Noah.

5. The other world religions also contain rich histories of mythology and fantastical sounding (to us) stories. On what basis can we Christians claim that our miracle stories are legitimate, yet theirs are flights of fancy? The mythology surrounding the Buddha, who lived 500 years before Jesus, includes tales of how he healed the sick, walked on water, and flew through the air. His birth was foretold by a spirit (a white elephant rather than the angel Gabriel) who then entered his mother's womb! At his birth, wise men predicted that he would become a great religious leader. Twentieth-century scholars Mircea Eliade and Joseph Campbell wrote that certain archetypal religious myths are found across cultures, histories, and religions. Examples include the Cosmic Tree, the Virgin BIrth, and The Resurrection.

6. The Bible itself is full of inconsistencies. How can it be an accurate historical record, when the various books contradict each other? Here is UNC Religion Professor Bart Ehrman:

"Just take the death of Jesus. What day did Jesus die on and what time of day? Did he die on the day before the Passover meal was eaten, as John explicitly says, or did he die after it was eaten, as Mark explicitly says? Did he die at noon, as in John, or at 9 a.m., as in Mark? Did Jesus carry his cross the entire way himself or did Simon of Cyrene carry his cross? It depends which Gospel you read. Did both robbers mock Jesus on the cross or did only one of them mock him and the other come to his defense? It depends which Gospel you read. Did the curtain in the temple rip in half before Jesus died or after he died? It depends which Gospel you read ... Or take the accounts of the resurrection. Who went to the tomb on the third day? Was it Mary alone or was it Mary with other women? If it was Mary with other women, how many other women were there, which ones were they, and what were their names? Was the stone rolled away before they got there or not? What did they see in the tomb? Did they see a man, did they see two men, or did they see an angel? It depends which account you read."

7. Reading the Bible as a literal historical account of events from the past limits the power of these stories. Rather than expressing universal truths, a literal interpretation limits the actions of God to certain events in history. God's actions in the world become finite, confined to certain historical events: like the chess master making individual moves on a chessboard frozen in time two thousand years ago. Reading these same stories mythologically, however, can bring forth their universal qualities.

8. A literal reading of the Bible alienates much of our society. The stories were written in a different age with different views on social justice -- an age in which slavery was legitimate, an age when discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation was the norm. Too often because of this history, the Bible is used to justify intolerance today.

Reading the Bible as mythology is not a new concept. Two of the early Church Fathers, Origen (185-254 AD) and Augustine (354-430 AD), both interpreted Genesis metaphorically, rejecting literal interpretations. Early in the 20th century, German theologian Rudolf Bultmann called for a "demythologizing" of the New Testament for many of the reasons given above. Rather, the movement in many fundamentalist circles today to read the Bible as inerrant (an extreme form of literalism, in which every word of Bible is viewed as true) is a late development from the 19th century as a response to the chipping away at the historicity of the stories since the Enlightenment.

I fear that an insistence on a literal or historical reading of the Bible will ultimately lead to the irrelevance of Christianity in our society. By throwing off the shackles of having to believe in the historicity of the Bible, we are free to interpret the stories as a testament to the religious experiences of people from a different age -- a testament that communicates a meaning about their experiences of Ultimate Reality, of God. I understand that their experiences of the divine ground in their lives were interpreted through the lens of a pre-modern view of the world, and my own religious experiences will take on a different form today.

Follow Jeffrey Small on Twitter:

Disclaimer: Neyo Webster of Zionism Unveiled does NOT espouse ALL of the conclusions of this author. However, to bring balance to Biblical studies, this perspective is beneficial.

Saturday, July 23, 2011

The Pre-Mesopotamic Origins of Abraham: What the "Black Hebrew Israelites" Are NOT Teaching {EXCLUSIVE}

The origin of the names for Eber and the Hebrews, as used in European Christian languages, derived from Aramaic עבר ʿĒḇer and עברי ʿIḇrāy, as spoken in the Roman province of Judaea and by those Jews who escaped the province's destruction. When Greek-writing Judean scholars compiled the Septuagint, the adaptations chosen for these names (for whatever reason) were Εβερ Heber and Εβραιος Hebraios. These names were adapted through LATIN and FRENCH BEFORE reaching ENGLISH as "HEBER" and "HEBREW", and these names WERE USED in the KJV New Testament.

The KJV Old Testament was largely translated NOT from Greek and Latin sources, BUT from existing Hebrew texts accessible to scholars at the time, EMPLOYING A UNIQUELY ANGLO-SAXON METHOD OF ADAPTING HEBREW WORDS AND NAMES. As such, in the Old Testament, "Eber" was used WITHOUT THE H, likely reflecting the common Hebrew dialects used AMONG THE JEWS IN EUROPE.

However, THE KVJ TRANSLATORS CHOSE to use the New Testament name "Hebrew" (INSTEAD OF "Ibrite" or "Eberite") as the canonical term for the descendants of Eber in the Old Testament as well, likely to avoid confusing lay readers. But one may NEVER really know for sure.

As the King James Version of the Bible became the primary Christian scripture of Great Britain, the association of "Eber" with "Hebrew" in the English-speaking religious world became a PERMANENT phenomenon. It was Josephus who made the conjectured connection when he wrote his Antiquities to a Roman (so-called “Gentile”) audience. In all likelihood, they got it from his works. Mind you, Josephus is a descendant of the Hasmonean priestly caste that reigned in Jerusalem from 140-116 BC….he MAY NOT be Israel by natural descent.

When Salah named his son “Eber” which means “THE REGION BEYOND”, a people nor a language was even considered. There is nothing within the text of Genesis 11 which records Shem’s genealogy to even suggest this. This was a mere interpolation on the part of Josephus centuries after the Biblical record, which wasn’t FULLY edited until AFTER the 7th century BC, and perhaps CENTURIES LATER!

So the term “Hebrew” which means “Passenger” is an addition made by the KJV translators…but yet we jump on the bandwagon and call ourselves “Hebrews” and Abraham a “Hebrew” without understanding the etymology of the word. Many of the Hebrew Israelites’ cosmogony is OFF!

Now the Bible tells us that Abraham came from Ur of the the Chaldees. But where did his ancestors come from? No one has ever really asked this question…not out loud anyway. Well I am going to tell you where Abraham’s family came from. Abraham’s ancestors came from the Kwahu people. They are a branch of the Akan people whose descendants can be found in West Africa today, namely Ghana. Historical evidence shows that these people settled the Upper Tigris River Valley FROM the African mainland, namely ANCIENT EGYPT!

Western historians have identified these people as Adiabene, which became a vassal kingdom of the Parthian Empire (ca 140 BC-224 AD) Even Abraham’s father’s name Terah is of Akan (Egyptian) origin, which is really Tena. It was transposed into Terah much later by Hebrew scholars in the Babylonian exile.

Let it be known that “Ur of the Chaldees” IS A MODERN ENGLISH NAME for the geographical region near the estuary of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers which run through Northeast Africa, not the “Middle East” as coined by WWII radio correspondents. What was this area called in ancient times when the Biblical story claims Abraham was leaving there. If Abraham ever originated from Mesopotamia, it means he must have originated from a separate people who came there CENTURIES PRIOR!

So you may ask, “Why does the Bible ONLY have Abraham’s ORIGINS in Ur?” Very simple….the Bible was compiled GENERATIONS LATER in the Babylonian exile by the Judean scribes. Jeremiah and the prophets continued to condemn the rulers of Judea as fools who could have avoided ALL these tribulations had they listened to their prophets (Jer 27:6-8) Ezekiel concluded his condemnation of the captured Israelite people with a hopeful utopian end in which the Israelites would rebuild the Temple, the priests would be the overlords again and Yahweh would live with his people. Isn’t that right? From these tribulations in their lives and history, many of Israel RETURNED TO EGYPT! And those remained in captivity QUICKLY settled into a life of PROSPERITY. That’s why many of them did not go back to rebuild the Temple under Ezra and Nehemiah in 457 BC, the year of their LIMITED RETURN to Canaan.


Israel’s PRIDE lies in their descent from Abraham….However Messiah said, “And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.” (Mt 3:9). They GLORY in their “SUPERIORITY” OVER THE GENTILES. But if Abraham was NOT A HEBREW OR A JUDEAN OR AN ISRAELITE….then the glorying is BASELESS. That is the point of my argument! Abraham was neither of these nor his sons Isaac and Jacob. Isaac and Jacob were CANAANITES by birth! Canaan is the so-called “cursed” son of Ham. A boy cursed by his drunken grandfather Noah!

To reiterate and drive this point home….. If the ancient ‘Judean’ people THAT BECAME Hebrews or Israelites came from the line of Abraham then they were NOT ORIGINALLY HEBREWS OR ISRAELITES. The issue becomes even more complex from the fact that if Abraham was NOT ORIGINALLY A HEBREW OR ISRAELITE, then his son Isaac was also NOT ONE EITHER. We must also conclude that Abraham’s grandsons ESAU and JACOB were not either. Israelites claim direct descent from Jacob, a Canaanite, by birth! Hebrew Israelites should be careful NOT to base their entire theology on the English translation “Abraham the Hebrew”. That’s ‘ONE’ TRANSLATION that I have shown to be the rendering of the KJV TRANSLATORS OF 1611, which became a PERMANENT PHENOMENON IN ALL THE ENGLISH BIBLE TRANSLATIONS!

You still may be arguing…but what about Shem…Let’s take it to history….Will Durant in his magnum opus “The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage” states, “Of their (Israel’s) RACIAL origin, we can only say VAGUELY that they were Semites.” (p.302) In Durant’s discussion on “Sumeria”, he writes, “The early history of Mesoptamia is in one aspect the struggle of NON-SEMITIC PEOPLES OF SUMERIA to preserve their independence against the expansion and inroads of the Semites FROM Kish (Cush/Ethiopia) and Agade (Akkadia), and other centers in the north. (p. 118 of the same volume).

Drusilla Dunjee Houston states in her book “Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire”, pp. 196-197, “The life of the Semitic and Hamitic races must have been closely associated after the deluge. So close is the apparent relationship that SOME AUTHORITIES HAVE LOOKED UPON ABRAHAM AS HAMITIC. Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees. But he descended by direct line from a Semitic (?) father. (Semitic meaning “mixed”) His mother may have been Hamitic for Abraham was spoken of as a Chaldean. All down the line of the after years we find Hebrews taking wives out of the Ethiopian race. The Babylonian account of the deluge is OLDER than the Biblical story. It does not take away from it but rather corroborates its truth.

There is the same close relationship between the code of Hammurabi and the Mosaic law. Both were inspired by a common Creator. The Chaldean law was perhaps the Ethiopian remembrance of the best jurisprudence of the antediluvian world. Read the statutes of Hammurabi and you will be astounded at the likeness of these and the lesser laws of Israel. It was WRITTEN LONG BEFORE the giving of the Mosaic law. The “Wiseman of the East,” seeking the young child prove that they held the wires of revelation. The hope of the coming of the Messiah WAS WRITTEN upon Babylonian tablets MORE THAN 2000 BC.”

The great English antiquary Godfrey Higgins stated, “Chaldeans, who were closely related to Babylonians, were Negroes." (Anacalypsis 1927, 2:364) You folks who claim to be from the tribe of Judah call yourselves so-called “Negroes”, right. Well, BAM…there it is!

To conclude….Abraham begat Isaac by Sarah, his CHALDEAN wife WHO WAS ALSO HIS HALF-SISTER (Gen. 20:11-12), and Ishmael by Hagar, an AFRICAN woman who was the daughter of an Egyptian-Ethiopian Pharaoh, according to Rabbinic tradition. Ishmael, Abraham’s first-born, is acknowledged as the father of all Arabs, whereas Isaac is considered one of the fathers of the children of Israel. From Jacob’s loins came the 12 tribes of Israel. Each of those sons had several sons. Jacob ALSO had a daughter. You very well could be a descendant of Dinah…and therefore that would leave you out of the inheritance found in the sons!. Shalom.

Compiled by Neyo Webster from "The Africans Who Wrote the Bible" by Nana Darkwah, "The Antiquiites" by Josephus, and several Internet articles in the public domain.
Copyright © 2011 Zionism Unveiled Productions. All Rights Reserved.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

My Beef with "Black Hebrew Israelite" Groups

What I find problematic with many "Black Hebrew Israelite" groups in particular is that they FAIL to study ancient Israelite cosmogony, which is any theory concerning the coming into existence or origin of the universe, or about how reality came to be. In light of this, they err in their theosophy, which is spiritual philosophy (or God-wisdom) carried out into one's life and practice. Israel did not exist in a vacuum. And I must add, Israel's pre-Mesopotamic origins are NEVER explored by Western scholars NOR these so-called "Black Hebrew Israelite" teachers. Something that makes you go hmmm???

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

The MLK That's Never Quoted

"If the Negro is to be free, he must move down into the inner resources of his own soul, and sign with a pen an ink of self-assertive manhood his own emancipation proclamation!" ~MLK

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Jewish Woman (?) Casey Anthony (THE MURDERER) Verdict Leaves Nation Stunned

Is Casey Anthony Jewish? This didn't occur to me before seeing this post on YouTube.

Monday, July 4, 2011

National Community Conference 9/18/2011 - Qimah -

Qimah was established to create a means of functional unity, education and self-preservation within our nation. Our people are in a state of spiritual and economic emergency, which calls for those who are enlightened to take a stand and defend those who are physically and/or spiritually unable to do so themselves. Qimah represents the leaders in our communities taking a unified stand to work towards the collective benefit of our people. Qimah also stands as a means to create an orderly medium for settling our national and theological disputes. We are calling ALL the leaders in our communities to stand up and represent for our people!

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Bobby Fischer on the Jews

The great Chess champion Bobby Fischer shares his views on the Jews. Fischer, who himself was Jewish, makes some revealing comments. I do not endorse his statement about Jews being eradicated. Personally, it appears to be more of an emotional rant than an actualized reality on his part.

Friday, July 1, 2011

Zeitgeist REFUTED & DEBUNKED! (Religious Portion)

Elliott Nesch has taken the time to go through the claims of the Zeitgeist movie and reveal their lies, in the religious portion, one by one. Do you really believe that the Jesus of the Bible has His roots in mythology? Then you are sorely mistaken. If you are open to the TRUTH, then watch this whole video. Elliot's youtube channel is: