- Jan 25, 2009
- 19,765
- 1,428
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Shalom
I was having a good discussion with one of my old friends on the subject of how maps can make such a difference in the way we see the world - and he was noting this to me in light of how often it seemed that people were prone to make claims of him as being crazy whenever he'd note that Middle Eastern culture was directly connected to and reflective of African culture - in light of how often people have said that those who are Black are not really present within the scriptures or current events as much as others who are Arab or Semitic like the Jews.
For him, it was a big deal when it comes to Eurocentric views that seem to influence how others read the Bible (including with present day events when it comes to seeing the ways Europe intervened in the are of the Middle-East to create the territories largely during colonialism and shape a lot of problems known currently) - and when I noted to him the beauty of Eastern Christianity in its connection to the African context (Egypt, Libya, etc.), he pointed out to me that it needed to be said that the Middle East used to be called North Eastern Africa - with the "Middle East" term coming on later to divide and lead to a lot of other issues that never were present before when those nations in the current "Middle East" were considered African nations.
For more,
Maps make a world of difference when it comes to the ways that territory can shift the way you see things and impact the policies you end up creating afterward...as is the case when people groups are divorced from areas due to saying they (visually) were never connected there - leading to the media, history books and many other factors impacting the emphasis people may give you on certain topics or leading to a lack of addressment on why certain groups are left out of the picture whenever discussions occur.
I had to stop and note (although I had disagreements) where I could understand where he was coming from - for it has always seemed odd to me whenever others don't acknowledge....Since Egypt is located in North-East Africa, why is it that Egyptians are considered Middle Easterners and not Africans? And the same goes for other issues....as it concerns the ways that Africa has impacted everything from trade to customs in the Middle-East areas for centuries...even though it seems denied. Had a similar dialogue with another when we were talking about the situation with King Solomon in 1 Kings 10/2 Chronicles 9 with his meeting with the Queen of Sheba - as I've heard many say, counter to what Ethiopian Orthodox Christians claim, that Sheba was from the country of Yemen rather than from Ethiopia.....and although I can see how that would logically make sense, it was always fascinating that part of the underlying reason behind why others didn't want Sheba to be from Ethiopia was because there was more focus in saying it was a Middle-Eastern country she hailed from rather than an African one.....and I say that in light of how often people say claiming Sheba ( Genesis 10:6-8 , Genesis 25:2-4 , 1 Chronicles 1:8-10 ) as an Ethiopian narrative is simply an Afro-Centric viewpoint without basis - even though it seems difficult to get past the point that people seem slow to accept that even Yemen was once considered PART of Africa itself - with the imagery not lost on those in Early History when it came to seeing Arabs/Africans connected and the impact of a great African Queen coming to Solomon for wisdom.
Of course, others have pointed out that there is no evidence that the Queen of Sheba did come from Aksum (as, again, it has been debated that Sheba is perhaps in Southern Arabia originally or Yemen) - despite how it has become part of the Ethiopian church's central tenets due to others feeling like there're many reasons to think Ethiopia was the same as Sheba...as some have noted that Yemen was a vassal of Ethiopia ...and for more, one can read the renowned historian Gibbon’s book "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire or see this fact also reported on the Qu’ran since in both books one can read, for instance, about the war of Abraha who was an Ethiopian ruler of Yemen (and from these and similar other facts, one could have concluded that Queen of Sheba used to rule Ethiopia and her vassal Yemen).
But even if she wasn't from Ethiopia, it is still amazing to see how much trouble many go through in order to claim that the Queen of Sheba could NEVER have been from a great African nation (in their minds) and yet don't acknowledge if more is up than they realize. This is also said in light of how often it seems Jews who come from African background have been fiercly questioned as to their identity as Hebrews (some even denied the right to be in Israel) even though they could easily point out their Semitic heritage
When I study the history of Abraham's descendants (including what occurred with Ishmael and with Egypt - even as it concerns Joseph's work with the Pharoahs when the Hebrews were living in Egypt for a long time), I have to pause & wonder how it was that much of African culture got disconnected from it while one part of the globe seemed to take the focus for ALL of it - and it's something I've had to wrestle with for some time. Even as it concerns the Holy Land itself, I'm amazed at how often those who are African have been mistreated and deemed to not be rooted in the narrative - even though the borders of Biblical Israel included territory that Africans came from.
In example,
Specifically,when the Lord made the covenant with Abram, he said: “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.” (Genesis 15:18). It was here that the Lord defined the northern and southern borders of Israel, long before the nation of Israel came into existence. It went from the river of Egypt in the south to the great river Euphrates in the north would include all of modern day Lebanon and three-fourths of modern day Syria. Moreover, when God spoke to Moses about the Promised Land (Numbers 34:1-15), he specifically laid out the southern, western, northern and eastern borders of the Land....essentially promising for the borders of Israel to un from the wilderness on the east side of the Jordan river to the uttermost sea (Red Sea) on the west side of the Sinai..as well as from the Euphrates river in the north, to the river of Egypt in the south.
When it came to the Kingdom of David himself, it was the case that Israel expanded greatly, controlling a number of weaker client states like Philistia , Moab, Edom, Ammon , with a number of Aramaean city-states (Aram-Zobah and Aram-Damascus ) becoming vassal states imperial border stretched from the Mediterranean Sea to theArabian Desert, from the Red Sea to the Euphrates River....with the Empire covering a large land area. And with King Solomon's kingdom that followed, its territory extended into Africa itself ( 1 Kings 5:1) even further with trade - meaning many who were Hebrews also expanded territory.
But because of the view that only what's deemed as the "Middle East" is Biblical territory, it seems that many Hebrew people in Africa seem left behind as if they are of no consequence - and to me, that's an issue.
If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to hear sometime. Studying Eastern Christianity (especially as it concerns the Copts and Ethiopian believers), it is fascinating to see the ways that many of them have been treated when it comes to discussing what is....or isn't...a part of the Holy Land experience.
I was having a good discussion with one of my old friends on the subject of how maps can make such a difference in the way we see the world - and he was noting this to me in light of how often it seemed that people were prone to make claims of him as being crazy whenever he'd note that Middle Eastern culture was directly connected to and reflective of African culture - in light of how often people have said that those who are Black are not really present within the scriptures or current events as much as others who are Arab or Semitic like the Jews.
For him, it was a big deal when it comes to Eurocentric views that seem to influence how others read the Bible (including with present day events when it comes to seeing the ways Europe intervened in the are of the Middle-East to create the territories largely during colonialism and shape a lot of problems known currently) - and when I noted to him the beauty of Eastern Christianity in its connection to the African context (Egypt, Libya, etc.), he pointed out to me that it needed to be said that the Middle East used to be called North Eastern Africa - with the "Middle East" term coming on later to divide and lead to a lot of other issues that never were present before when those nations in the current "Middle East" were considered African nations.
For more,
- The Deception concerning Northeast Africa. - Assata Shakur
- The Middle East or Northeastern Africa? « Natural Culture Natural ...
- London and the Invention of the Middle East: Money, Power, ... - Page 2
- London and the Invention of the Middle East: Money, Power, and War, 1902-1922...
- Is There a Middle East?: The Evolution of a Geopolitical Concept
Maps make a world of difference when it comes to the ways that territory can shift the way you see things and impact the policies you end up creating afterward...as is the case when people groups are divorced from areas due to saying they (visually) were never connected there - leading to the media, history books and many other factors impacting the emphasis people may give you on certain topics or leading to a lack of addressment on why certain groups are left out of the picture whenever discussions occur.
I had to stop and note (although I had disagreements) where I could understand where he was coming from - for it has always seemed odd to me whenever others don't acknowledge....Since Egypt is located in North-East Africa, why is it that Egyptians are considered Middle Easterners and not Africans? And the same goes for other issues....as it concerns the ways that Africa has impacted everything from trade to customs in the Middle-East areas for centuries...even though it seems denied. Had a similar dialogue with another when we were talking about the situation with King Solomon in 1 Kings 10/2 Chronicles 9 with his meeting with the Queen of Sheba - as I've heard many say, counter to what Ethiopian Orthodox Christians claim, that Sheba was from the country of Yemen rather than from Ethiopia.....and although I can see how that would logically make sense, it was always fascinating that part of the underlying reason behind why others didn't want Sheba to be from Ethiopia was because there was more focus in saying it was a Middle-Eastern country she hailed from rather than an African one.....and I say that in light of how often people say claiming Sheba ( Genesis 10:6-8 , Genesis 25:2-4 , 1 Chronicles 1:8-10 ) as an Ethiopian narrative is simply an Afro-Centric viewpoint without basis - even though it seems difficult to get past the point that people seem slow to accept that even Yemen was once considered PART of Africa itself - with the imagery not lost on those in Early History when it came to seeing Arabs/Africans connected and the impact of a great African Queen coming to Solomon for wisdom.
Of course, others have pointed out that there is no evidence that the Queen of Sheba did come from Aksum (as, again, it has been debated that Sheba is perhaps in Southern Arabia originally or Yemen) - despite how it has become part of the Ethiopian church's central tenets due to others feeling like there're many reasons to think Ethiopia was the same as Sheba...as some have noted that Yemen was a vassal of Ethiopia ...and for more, one can read the renowned historian Gibbon’s book "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire or see this fact also reported on the Qu’ran since in both books one can read, for instance, about the war of Abraha who was an Ethiopian ruler of Yemen (and from these and similar other facts, one could have concluded that Queen of Sheba used to rule Ethiopia and her vassal Yemen).
But even if she wasn't from Ethiopia, it is still amazing to see how much trouble many go through in order to claim that the Queen of Sheba could NEVER have been from a great African nation (in their minds) and yet don't acknowledge if more is up than they realize. This is also said in light of how often it seems Jews who come from African background have been fiercly questioned as to their identity as Hebrews (some even denied the right to be in Israel) even though they could easily point out their Semitic heritage
When I study the history of Abraham's descendants (including what occurred with Ishmael and with Egypt - even as it concerns Joseph's work with the Pharoahs when the Hebrews were living in Egypt for a long time), I have to pause & wonder how it was that much of African culture got disconnected from it while one part of the globe seemed to take the focus for ALL of it - and it's something I've had to wrestle with for some time. Even as it concerns the Holy Land itself, I'm amazed at how often those who are African have been mistreated and deemed to not be rooted in the narrative - even though the borders of Biblical Israel included territory that Africans came from.
In example,
Within the Hebrew Bible the Land of Israel is the region which God promised to the descendants of Abraham through his son Isaac and to the descendants of Jacob, Abraham’s grandson.
Specifically,when the Lord made the covenant with Abram, he said: “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.” (Genesis 15:18). It was here that the Lord defined the northern and southern borders of Israel, long before the nation of Israel came into existence. It went from the river of Egypt in the south to the great river Euphrates in the north would include all of modern day Lebanon and three-fourths of modern day Syria. Moreover, when God spoke to Moses about the Promised Land (Numbers 34:1-15), he specifically laid out the southern, western, northern and eastern borders of the Land....essentially promising for the borders of Israel to un from the wilderness on the east side of the Jordan river to the uttermost sea (Red Sea) on the west side of the Sinai..as well as from the Euphrates river in the north, to the river of Egypt in the south.
When it came to the Kingdom of David himself, it was the case that Israel expanded greatly, controlling a number of weaker client states like Philistia , Moab, Edom, Ammon , with a number of Aramaean city-states (Aram-Zobah and Aram-Damascus ) becoming vassal states imperial border stretched from the Mediterranean Sea to theArabian Desert, from the Red Sea to the Euphrates River....with the Empire covering a large land area. And with King Solomon's kingdom that followed, its territory extended into Africa itself ( 1 Kings 5:1) even further with trade - meaning many who were Hebrews also expanded territory.
But because of the view that only what's deemed as the "Middle East" is Biblical territory, it seems that many Hebrew people in Africa seem left behind as if they are of no consequence - and to me, that's an issue.
If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to hear sometime. Studying Eastern Christianity (especially as it concerns the Copts and Ethiopian believers), it is fascinating to see the ways that many of them have been treated when it comes to discussing what is....or isn't...a part of the Holy Land experience.
Last edited:
