Lets go ahead and deal with this African Hebrew confusion. It's not complicated. We've dealt with this in detail on our article Noah and His Three Sons, but in short....
Abraham was the first Hebrew (Gen 14:13) and acknowledged even in the New Testament as the "father" of the Hebrews (John 8:33 and other places).
And we know that God told Abraham, the first Hebrew, to leave his family in Gen 12:1-2
So I always ask the question:
Well, what ethnicity (not lineage) was Abraham's family that he left?
To properly answer this question we must go back to Noah's sons:
"And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan. These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread." ~ Gen 9:18-19
What most of us were taught:
Ham was African; Shem was Middle Eastern; Japheth was White = NOT IN BIBLE, but conjured up to justify slavery.
What we should have been taught:
Ham was African; Shem was African; Japheth was African = BIBLICAL TRUTH
Abraham - Descendant from Shem = AFRICAN by ethnicity
"Hebrew" denotes a SPIRITUAL covenant (Gen 15:13-18) and was to the descendants of Abraham. Abraham was an African. Just listen...
God never created a new ethnicity with Abraham. A new ethnicity being created for God's people is nowhere in Scripture.
All God did was told Abraham to
"Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:" ~ Gen 12:1
Abraham's "kindred" were AFRICANS - descendants of Shem - the African by ethnicity - according to correct context of scripture.
Many times we confuse seed or lineage with ethnicity. These are not the same.
Lets say your natural father has blood brothers. Your father and his brothers will have different seeds, but are of the same ethnicity. You are of the seed of your father. You are not of the seed of your father's brothers. But... you, your father, his brothers and the rest of the family will all be of the same ethnicity.
The Bible always spoke in seeds or lineages - which is family.
And so there is no confusion, God goes on to say in verse 2:
" And I will make of thee a great nation..."
We were also incorrectly taught that nation means ethnicity - in the Bible.
I know that this culture uses the word nation to mean ethnicity. You can create a language and decide what any word means. You can put it in the dictionaries and define it as you will.
But to imply that this is what the word meant in Biblical context is error.
And James Strong backs this error up in his vague definition of the Hebrew word "gôwy" which is translated as "nations". He defines the word gôwy as a "Gentile, heathen, nation, people" (Strong's H1471) which gives the implication of ethnicity.
But the context of scripture does not agree with James Strong.
In Genesis the 10th chapter, the chapter known as the "table of nations", if nations meant ethnicities, then each son of everybody mentioned would be a different ethnicity. Read that chapter again..
But we know that Cush/Ethiopia was the son of Ham... and there is no doubt that they were both of the ethnicity that we call African.
I can go on and on talking about Genesis 10 not making sense if nations meant ethnicities.
According to the correct context of the Bible, nation was the largest unit of a family.
For example, we know that Israel was a nation...
"And what one nation in the earth is like thy people Israel.." ~ 2 Chr 7:21
Jacob/Israel had twelve sons. Each son was a progenitor of the twelve tribes of Israel.
Each tribe was made up of various clans - which means a thousand, each clan were made up of households, and households were made up of individuals.
This is what the Bible confirms as a nation (Joshua 7:14 & 1 Sam 10:17-21)
The word nation in the Bible is dealt with in detail in the video below.
But as for ethnicity in the Bible, everybody was what we call "African" in the Old Testament.
So whether you claim Hebrew or African, we are ALL AFRICANS BY ETHNICITY.
We can't get away from the Motherland, it's impossible...
Once again, the term Hebrew originally denoted Abraham's descendants, or Africans with a COVENANT.
All Africans are not in that covenant.
Only Abraham and his descendants.
**And again, because people get emotional on this subject... but I know that Abraham did not descend from Ham. Abraham descended from Shem.
But if Ham was "African", his brothers (Shem and yes Japheth too) had to be whatever ethnicity Ham was. If you know the ethnicity of one person in a family, and they have the same parents - both parents of the same ethnicity, then you know the ethnicity of the family! So Shem and Japheth had to be whatever ethnicity Ham was - in which all scholars agree that Ham was African.
It's not complicated when the smoke is clear.
Quite honestly, this is another case of divide and conquer. It's time to adjust the narrative. We'll dig deeper at another time...
** As for Japheth, he was not white. Many of his descendants are white today (scholars believe Asians and East Indians too), but Japheth himself could not have been white. Scripture or history simply does not confirm this.
Scripture and history does confirm that all Hebrews in the Bible were Africans by ethnicity.
But like I keep reiterating, and I don't mean to sound like a scratched record, but not all Africans are Hebrews.
You'd be surprised at the number of people who, even after reading this, will contact me and furiously try to tell me that we are not Hamites! Lol
I understand that you can't reason with emotions. But only the truth will make us free family.
The truth is, according to the Bible, being a Hebrew denoted being a descendant of Abraham - and therefore having a SPIRITUAL covenant with God. Abraham was the "father of faith".
Originally there was nothing ethnic at all about being a Hebrew.
So I encourage you to kill all of this self-righteous Hebrew against African (and vise versa) mess. It's not founded in Scripture.
I know many camps teach this error, but you are responsible for knowing what is true.
Search the scriptures...
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" ~ John 8:32
Truth is freedom. Anything outside of truth is slavery #bondage
Live and bear fruit in Liberty!
By Minister Rodney Jones, specializing in Biblical HistoryArticle copied from "WORLD'S BEST KEPT SECRET"page
"How often do we see in Eastern monarchies and even in European states a difference of origin between the ruling class, to which the royal family belongs, and the mass of the people! We need not leave Western Asia and Egypt; we find there Turks ruling over nations to the race of which they do not belong, although they have adopted their religion. In the same way as the Turks of Baghdad, who are Finns, now reign over Semites, Turanian kings may have led into Egypt and governed a population of mixed origin where the Semitic element was prevalent. If we consider the mixing up of races which took place in Mesopotamia in remote ages, the invasions which the country had to suffer, the repeated conflicts of which it was the theatre, there is nothing extraordinary that populations coming out of this land should have presented a variety of races and origins."
“The inhabitants of this part of Arabia nearly all belong to the race of Himyar. Their complexion is almost as black as the Abyssinians,”-- Baron von Maltzan, 'Geography of Southern Arabia' (1872)
“ [the Hamida are] small chocolate colored beings, stunted and thin… with mops of bushy hair… straggling beards , vicious eyes, frowning brows … armed with scabbards slung over the shoulder and Janbiyyah daggers…” a people “of the great Hejazi tribe that has kept his blood pure for the last 13 centuries…”-- Sir Richard Burton (1879)
“The people of Dhufar are of the Qahtan tribe, the sons of Joktan mentioned in Genesis: they are of Hamitic or African rather than Arab types…”--Arnold Wilson, The Geographical Journal (1927)
“the most prosperous tribe of all the Hamitic group, possessing innumerable camels, herds of cattle and the richest frankincense country. They resemble the Bisharin tribe of the Nubian desert. Men of big bone , they have long faces long narrow jaws, noses of a refined shape long curly hair and brown skin.”--Richmond Palmer (1929)
“Mahra is the Arab name for the Bedouin tribes who are different in appearance to other Arabs, having almost beardless faces, fuzzy hair and dark pigmentation – such as the Qarra, Mahra and Harasis… Also on “…the Qarra, Mahra and Harasis with parts of other tribes. The language is derived from the language of the Sabaeans, Minaeans and Himyarites. The Mahra with other Southern Arabian peoples seem aligned to the Hamitic race of north-east Africa… The Mahra are believed to be descended from the Habasha, who colonized Ethiopia in the first millennium BC”-- David Phillips, Peoples on the Move (2001)
“European observers have made much of their physical resemblance to Somalis and Ethiopians, but there is no historical evidence of any connections.”-- E. Peterson, 'Oman’s Diverse Society: Southern Oman'
“Mr. Baldwin draws a marked distinction between the modern Mahomedan Semitic population of Arabia and their great Cushite, Hamite, or Ethiopian predecessors. The former, he says, ‘are comparatively modern in Arabia,’ they have ‘appropriated the reputation of the old race,’ and have unduly occupied the chief attention of modern scholars.”-- Charles Hardwick (1872)
“Among ‘these Negroid features which may be counted normal in Arabs are the full,rather everted lips, shortness and width of nose, certain blanks in the bearded areas of the face between the lower lip and chin and on the cheeks; large, luscious,gazelle-like eyes, a dark brown complexion, and a tendency for the hair to grow in ringlets. Often the features of the more Negroid Arabs are derivatives of Dravidian India rather than inheritances of Hamitic Africa. Although the Arab of today is sharply differentiated from the Negro of Africa, yet there must have been a time when both were represented by a single ancestral stock; in no other way can the prevalence of certain Negroid features be accounted for in the natives of Arabia.”-- Henry Field, Anthropology Memoirs Volume 4 (1902)
“There is a considerable mass of evidence to show that there was a very close resemblance between the proto-Egyptians and the Arabs before either became intermingled with Armenoid racial elements.”-- Elliot Smith, he Ancient Egyptians and the Origins of Civilization (1923)
“In Arabia the first inhabitants were probably a dark-skinned, shortish population intermediate, between the African Hamites and the Dravidians of India and forming a single African Asiatic belt with these.”-- Handbook of the Territories which form the Theater of Operations of the Iraq Petroleum Company Limited and its Associated Companies