Cush Ina Ham, Inheritor of Noah and Adam

[Samaalic Era]

@pablo @Cam @Darwiish97 @land owner @Libaax Badeed @MSGA @Abdisamad3 @CaliTedesse

This is why Jews hate Ham and Cush. In the Book of Jasher, Noah gives the cloak of Adam pbuh to Ham and Ham gives it Cush. Check this out. As usual, the Jews play with the scripture similiar to how they slandered the prophets like Ismail pbuh


23 And Cush the son of Ham, the son of Noah, took a wife in those days in his old age, and she bare a son, and they called his name Nimrod, saying, At that time the sons of men again began to rebel and transgress against God, and the child grew up, and his father loved him exceedingly, for he was the son of his old age.



24 And the garments of skin which God made for Adam and his wife, when they went out of the garden, were given to Cush.



25 For after the death of Adam and his wife, the garments were given to Enoch, the son of Jared, and when Enoch was taken up to God, he gave them to Methuselah, his son.



26 And at the death of Methuselah, Noah took them and brought them to the ark, and they were with him until he went out of the ark.

Awoowe Ham is the true heir of the Noahic Covenant, not Shem

 

[Samaalic Era]

@geeljire madaxweyne @Timo Madow and proud

 

[Yahya]

@pablo @Cam @Darwiish97 @land owner @Libaax Badeed @MSGA @Abdisamad3 @CaliTedesse

This is why Jews hate Ham and Cush. In the Book of Jasher, Noah gives the cloak of Adam pbuh to Ham and Ham gives it Cush. Check this out. As usual, the Jews play with the scripture similiar to how they slandered the prophets like Ismail pbuh


23 And Cush the son of Ham, the son of Noah, took a wife in those days in his old age, and she bare a son, and they called his name Nimrod, saying, At that time the sons of men again began to rebel and transgress against God, and the child grew up, and his father loved him exceedingly, for he was the son of his old age.



24 And the garments of skin which God made for Adam and his wife, when they went out of the garden, were given to Cush.



25 For after the death of Adam and his wife, the garments were given to Enoch, the son of Jared, and when Enoch was taken up to God, he gave them to Methuselah, his son.



26 And at the death of Methuselah, Noah took them and brought them to the ark, and they were with him until he went out of the ark.

Awoowe Ham is the true heir of the Noahic Covenant, not Shem

They said he stole it. They re wrote the whole book to make africa and ham cursed. How come they had to come to africa when they was broke then?

God blessed africa. More so than any other continent. The ppl are divided and stupid laakin. The land is blessed tho. Most abundant in resources.

 

[Yahya]

What chapter is this bro?

 

[Samaalic Era]

They said he stole it. They re wrote the whole book to make africa and ham cursed. How come they had to come to africa when they was broke then?

God blessed africa. More so than any other continent. The ppl are divided and stupid laakin. The land is blessed tho. Most abundant in resources.

Its classic Jews who cant accept that Shem and Semites were irrelevant in the ancient world. like @pablo and @Darwiish97 posted in an another thread, Cushites were the starters of civilisation and built Babylon and made the first writing script,farming and many other inventions

 

[Samaalic Era]

What chapter is this bro?

Chapter 7

 

[Yahya]

Its classic Jews who cant accept that Shem and Semites were irrelevant in the ancient world. like @pablo and @Darwiish97 posted in an another thread, Cushites were the starters of civilisation and built Babylon and made the first writing script,farming and many other inventions

Why did they say he stole it tho?

Can't nuh have asked god to kill him? the lie don't makes sense. Jews are bitter. Nuh had many sons. He would have sent them to kill him if he stole the garments.

They just can't accept that nimrod was the first king over all men.

 

[Samaalic Era]

Why did they say he stole it tho?

Can't nuh have asked god to kill him? the lie don't makes sense. Jews are bitter. Nuh had many sons. He would have sent them to kill him if he stole the garments.

They just can't accept that nimrod was the first king over all men.

Its the same thing when it comes to Ismail and Ishaq. They lie and say Ishaq was the child to be sacrificed and not Ismail when the verses clearly indicate that it was Ismail. The pattern is repeated throughout the bible

 

[pablo]

https://escholarship.org/content/qt6331d10p/qt6331d10p.pdf?t=mnip12

Good read

@Samaalic Era @Yahya @land owner @Timo Madow and proud

 

[Darwiish97]

@pablo @Cam @Darwiish97 @land owner @Libaax Badeed @MSGA @Abdisamad3 @CaliTedesse

This is why Jews hate Ham and Cush. In the Book of Jasher, Noah gives the cloak of Adam pbuh to Ham and Ham gives it Cush. Check this out. As usual, the Jews play with the scripture similiar to how they slandered the prophets like Ismail pbuh


23 And Cush the son of Ham, the son of Noah, took a wife in those days in his old age, and she bare a son, and they called his name Nimrod, saying, At that time the sons of men again began to rebel and transgress against God, and the child grew up, and his father loved him exceedingly, for he was the son of his old age.



24 And the garments of skin which God made for Adam and his wife, when they went out of the garden, were given to Cush.



25 For after the death of Adam and his wife, the garments were given to Enoch, the son of Jared, and when Enoch was taken up to God, he gave them to Methuselah, his son.



26 And at the death of Methuselah, Noah took them and brought them to the ark, and they were with him until he went out of the ark.

Awoowe Ham is the true heir of the Noahic Covenant, not Shem

Very informative and an interesting read indeed I’m just so amazed at the Hamitic history no wonder the racist colonial Europeans all said every major ancient monument and civilisation in all of Africa was due to the migration and presence of‘Caucasian pastoralists of Hamitic stock’I don’t agree with their attempt to lump us under them to claim our great history that outshines Rome and Greece let alone primitive Anglo saxons and ther Germanic or indo european tribes who were still having trial by fire and ordeal in the fricking tenth century when we had a complex pastoral democratic system of forming a guurti court composed of the victim and plaintiff’s agnatic paternal relatives from each ot their jilibs or lineage groups at the same time and earlier
We even had the legal notion of precedent and stare decisis before Europeans as our odayaal and garxajiyaal (attorneys) had to consider and abide by previous cases of similar fact and reach similar verdicts unless there was an exception we had witnesses markhaatiyaal and a system of various oaths such as putting ur hand in the soil in a certain area that had been dug and swearing traditional oaths when there were no witnesses or shortage of conclusive evidence to prove the veracity of an allegation
We later added Islamic oaths like talaq one and normal walahi billahi tallahi ones using the quran after Islam we adapted and incorporated these extra forms of oaths
I don’t agree with colonials saying all civilisations and monuments in Africa were as a result of us but they weren’t wrong as every impressive ancient monument in north east east and south east and parts of central Africa were directly because of hamites or indirectly due to cultural exchanges with hamites
They went back on this theory after colonialism became anathema and something to be frowned upon so they equally negated their earlier accurate statements of Hamitic civilisations due to the racial connotations affixed to the later theories (before dna sequencing and radio carbon dating to prove their racist remarks were actually true)
This is why there is a deliberate scholarly attempt to discredit Hamitic history and why there is more research done on fucking zulu languages than Somali Oromo or afar even tho they know these languages are the most ancient and the people speaking them are the most ancient people alive in the world today (we r all equally ancient as humans but hamites were the first modern homo sapien sapiens evidenced by the Lucy excavation in the afar state of Ethiopia, hamites were the first people to become civilised, we created civilisation would be a better way of putting it, while the rest of the world was still primitive, that’s why we also were the first to receive the word of god as far as history can attest (yes nuh so jews arabs can claim this too was the first post flood but we inherited nuh as he left everything and control to ham who in turn left it to cush and then nimrod before shit went south lol)

 

[Samaalic Era]

Very informative and an interesting read indeed I’m just so amazed at the Hamitic history no wonder the racist colonial Europeans all said every major ancient monument and civilisation in all of Africa was due to the migration and presence of‘Caucasian pastoralists of Hamitic stock’I don’t agree with their attempt to lump us under them to claim our great history that outshines Rome and Greece let alone primitive Anglo saxons and ther Germanic or indo european tribes who were still having trial by fire and ordeal in the fricking tenth century when we had a complex pastoral democratic system of forming a guurti court composed of the victim and plaintiff’s agnatic paternal relatives from each ot their jilibs or lineage groups at the same time and earlier
We even had the legal notion of precedent and stare decisis before Europeans as our odayaal and garxajiyaal (attorneys) had to consider and abide by previous cases of similar fact and reach similar verdicts unless there was an exception we had witnesses markhaatiyaal and a system of various oaths such as putting ur hand in the soil in a certain area that had been dug and swearing traditional oaths when there were no witnesses or shortage of conclusive evidence to prove the veracity of an allegation
We later added Islamic oaths like talaq one and normal walahi billahi tallahi ones using the quran after Islam we adapted and incorporated these extra forms of oaths
I don’t agree with colonials saying all civilisations and monuments in Africa were as a result of us but they weren’t wrong as every impressive ancient monument in north east east and south east and parts of central Africa were directly because of hamites or indirectly due to cultural exchanges with hamites
They went back on this theory after colonialism became anathema and something to be frowned upon so they equally negated their earlier accurate statements of Hamitic civilisations due to the racial connotations affixed to the later theories (before dna sequencing and radio carbon dating to prove their racist remarks were actually true)
This is why there is a deliberate scholarly attempt to discredit Hamitic history and why there is more research done on fucking zulu languages than Somali Oromo or afar even tho they know these languages are the most ancient and the people speaking them are the most ancient people alive in the world today (we r all equally ancient as humans but hamites were the first modern homo sapien sapiens evidenced by the Lucy excavation in the afar state of Ethiopia, hamites were the first people to become civilised, we created civilisation would be a better way of putting it, while the rest of the world was still primitive, that’s why we also were the first to receive the word of god as far as history can attest (yes nuh so jews arabs can claim this too was the first post flood but we inherited nuh as he left everything and control to ham who in turn left it to cush and then nimrod before shit went south lol)

100 % saxiib. There is a clear attempt to discredit Hamitic and Cushitic history

 

[Apollo]

Ham in the Bible (Genesis) was a Lebanese (Canaanite), not an African fellow. This is a common misconception.

Cush in the Bible is often in reference to a town in Iraq called Kish (e.g. Nimrod son of Cush is an Iraqi).

The few correct references to actual Cushites are in Book of Numbers 12:1 and Jeremiah 13:23. Talking about the North Sudanese (Kush).

 

[Samaalic Era]

Ham in the Bible (Genesis) was a Lebanese (Canaanite), not a African fellow. This is a common misconception.

Cush in the Bible is often in reference to a town in Iraq called Kish (e.g. Nimrod son of Cush is an Iraqi).

The few correct references to actual Cushites are in Book of Numbers 12:1 and Jeremiah 13:23. Talking about the North Sudanese (Kush).

But Ham is his father saxiib. Canaan is himself a Hamite. We are the descendants of Nuh pbuh

 

[Samaalic Era]

@Apollo
Didn't Somalis come from the levant into North Africa and then to the Horn.

It makes sense if you think about it

 

[Apollo]

@Apollo
Didn't Somalis come from the levant into North Africa and then to the Horn.

It makes sense if you think about it

But that was thousands of years ago, way before the Bible.

But Ham is his father saxiib. Canaan is himself a Hamite. We are the descendants of Nuh pbuh

The Hebrews were nomads who traveled all over the Levant, Egypt, North Arabia, and Mesopotamia. That's where most of those events take place. Only later on in the Bible do they settle down permanently in Israel.

 

[Samaalic Era]

But that was thousands of years ago, way before the Bible.



The Hebrews were nomads who traveled all over the Levant and Mesopotamia. That's where most of those events take place. Only later on in the Bible do they settle down permanently in Israel.

One thing that would make sense is linking Afro Asiatic Hamito-semetic people to Nuh pbuh and around the end of the Ice Age around 10,000BC.

What do you think

 

[Apollo]

One thing that would make sense is linking Afro Asiatic Hamito-semetic people to Nuh pbuh and around the end of the Ice Age around 10,000BC.

What do you think

This is getting too controversial. It's better not to mix ancient history / anthropology with religion. :siilaanyolaugh:

The general consensus (between scientists and even some theologians) is that Noah's flood was a local flood somewhere in Northern Mesopotamia/Anatolia border region (ending near Armenia) and not a global one.

 

[Samaalic Era]

This is getting too controversial. It's better not to mix ancient history / anthropology with religion. :siilaanyolaugh:

The general consensus (between scientists and even some theologians) is that Noah's flood was a local flood somewhere in Northern Mesopotamia/Anatolia border region (ending near Armenia) and not a global one.

I agree that the flood is local.

I believe Islam and science do not conflict and I try to establish the link where there is evidence to support it.

This is what Islamic scholarship lacks today which is analysing theories which you support or refute

 

[Darwiish97]

Ham in the Bible (Genesis) was a Lebanese (Canaanite), not an African fellow. This is a common misconception.

Cush in the Bible is often in reference to a town in Iraq called Kish (e.g. Nimrod son of Cush is an Iraqi).

The few correct references to actual Cushites are in Book of Numbers 12:1 and Jeremiah 13:23. Talking about the North Sudanese (Kush).

So when the bible is mentioning cush son of Ham son of Noah is that not us bro cus we r from Noah and is nimrod the Cushite not related to us?

 

[Apollo]

So when the bible is mentioning cush son of Ham son of Noah is that not us bro cus we r from Noah and is nimrod the Cushite not related to us?

In my opinion, yes. It's a coincidence in name plus the longstanding misunderstanding in the world that Ham was an African.