I know that it says that he is coming from the tribe of Judah. However, I am wondering if that is truly the case. I know that the Kebra Nagast claims that Solomon went with Makeda/Queen of Sheba. The Holy Bible is filled with scandals and I do not think that it would leave out the union of these two. If it can have King Solomon’s Song of Solomon in explicit detail of his relationship with the Shulamite female, would not this tryst be noted (although the deeper layer of it is a prophetic notion to the relationship of the Messiah and His bride)?
Also, in the Old Testament, Yahweh allowed His very own Israelites to get killed off due to looking into the Ark of the Covenant because they were not Levis and not consecrated. He also, allowed the Philistines to get emerods and killed off when it was in their possession. Do you think the story of the Ethiopians carrying the Ark of the Covenant to Ethiopia without any notion in the story showing if any Levis carried it or not would standup to scrutiny? The Holy Bible has things like these covered. Small details of tribes, people and locations are in the Holy Bible which allows it to stand up to scrutiny. Even Uzziah was breached upon during the time when it was recaptured to the rightful owners! In other words, no one was allowed to touch or handle the Ark of the Covenant unless he was a consecrated Levi. The holiness and what it represented would not allow any other.
So, when the Ethiopians claim that they had the Ark and that some have descended from the tribe of Judah (one example, Menelik I), I have to wonder. Also, when Israel was scattered to Africa and some parts of Europe, they carried certain patterns of how they designed things. I am aware that some of their things changed along the way. However, they always had their royal buildings with columns that had flowery capitals with their petals folding downward. Their scepter had a round globular tip, they had their bricks pale or white in color stacked together in order or they had it where they used gray stones piled upon each other almost looking like an altar built as walls (some good examples are the wall in Zimbabwe and the ancient walls in Ireland). Old royal buildings of the highest degree found in Ghana reflect certain traits of these.
This king has what looks like a “caveman’s” club with prongs sticking out of it to bash people with. His beads look of course Hamitic African (they could be pearls—not sure), even his crown is different from how the Israelites who used metals to make their crowns. Something should reflect that he is of Hebrew descent. I read the bottom which does have in detail his lineage. However, I still wonder. The Ethiopians, to me, are notorious in fibbing concerning the things of Israel. However, there is one positive thing is that a copy of the Book of Enoch translated in their language was found in order to be translated into other languages.
I just have to add that I read the story of the Kebra Nagast where a small portion concerning the “Ark of the Covenant” was displayed on some site a while ago. So, off of that, is where I interpreted that there was no mention of a Levite in the story. I was able to read the whole story about the “Ark” recently. However, the story still does not line up or complement the Holy Bible. The story seems to have a Roman Catholic influence to it.
In Chapter 33 it states, “Only give us the fringes of the covering of the holy heavenly ZION, the Tabernacle of the Law of God, which we would embrace (or, greet).”
Also, Chapter 51 states, ‘now on the fringes are figures of gold that came forth from the land of ?ÂDÊS, which MOSES in SINAI commanded should be made (or, worked) in the fringe of the apparel of AARON his brother—gather [all these] together in the covering of ZION and give [them] to my son DAVID. For his mother said in [her] message by TÂMRÎN her servant, ‘Give us some of the fringe of the covering of ZION, so that we may worship it, we and those who are in subjection unto us and all our kingdom.’ And now, give it to him, and say unto him, ‘Take [and] worship this covering of ZION, for thy mother sent a message concerning this, and hath said unto thee thyself, ‘Give us some of the fringe of its covering, which we can worship, so that we may not, like the heathen, worship another [god].’’
For chapter 33, the only thing that had fringes applied to was the borders of the people’s garment. Numbers 15: 38 and 39 show this. There were no fringes applied to the covering of, what the Kebra calls, the “ZION” which I am assuming is the Ark of the Covenant.
Chapter 51 attempts to explain where the fringes came from because as I stated previously that the fringes were applied to the borders of the people’s garment. Aaron’s and his sons’ garments did not have fringes at the hem. The High Priest’s had pomegranates of alternating colors of blue, purple, red and the metal gold around his hem. Also, wires of gold were woven in each of those colors within the cloth. Yahweh does not allow for anyone to worship an item He commanded to make. They were symbolisms of His Kingdom.
Further it states, ‘This He said because the LEVITES had esteemed Him lightly. And say unto him: Take this covering of ZION, and this votive gift shall be in the place of it, and place it in thy sanctuary.’
The wording used or translation sounds Roman Catholic. When I read the word “votive”, I thought of candles. When I thought of candles, I thought of how there are many candles in the cathedral where people go to pray and light one in honor or in remembrance of a love one.
“Supplicatory” or “prayerful” are synonyms to the word “votive”.
Chapter 48 reveals, ‘And behold, the Angel of the Lord appeared again to AZÂRYÂS and he stood up above him like a pillar of fire, and he filled the house with his light. And he raised up AZÂRYÂS and said unto him, “Stand up, be strong, and rouse up thy brother ÊLM?YÂS, and ’AB?SÂ, and MÂKARÎ, and take the pieces of wood and I will open for thee the doors of the sanctuary. And take thou the Tabernacle of the Law of God, and thou shalt carry it without trouble and discomfort. And I, inasmuch as I have been commanded by God to be with it for ever, will be thy guide when thou shalt carry it away.”’
This is very contradictory to the way Yahweh works. He would never tell any of His Israelites to carry off the Ark of the Covenant just because some of them are commanded to go to another country with a king when Israel, the nation was not in exile! According to the Kebra, King Solomon was still the king of Israel and the nation itself was not in any real danger. They had no rights to take the “Ark of the Covenant”. Besides, Yahweh would allow the priests to hide it in the land of Israel than to make it go off in another land.
There are many many more discrepancies throughout the Kebra Nagast.
You are ignorant, judgmental and biased. You think you can interpret one book because you have a small understanding of another. If you want answers, try reading without your predisposed dissatisfaction. Read with an open mind. I agree that it reads as something that has been touched up by the powers that be. But how in the world are you able to endlessly point that out in the Kebra Nagast and forget to mention that the entire religion was changed by the powers that be. You’re using flawed vision to look at something flawed. Talk to God instead of overexciting yourself over a bunch dudes that neither of us will ever meet.
Do I read correctly that Le Grand Negus is also the King of Goa?
I know that it says that he is coming from the tribe of Judah. However, I am wondering if that is truly the case. I know that the Kebra Nagast claims that Solomon went with Makeda/Queen of Sheba. The Holy Bible is filled with scandals and I do not think that it would leave out the union of these two. If it can have King Solomon’s Song of Solomon in explicit detail of his relationship with the Shulamite female, would not this tryst be noted (although the deeper layer of it is a prophetic notion to the relationship of the Messiah and His bride)?
Also, in the Old Testament, Yahweh allowed His very own Israelites to get killed off due to looking into the Ark of the Covenant because they were not Levis and not consecrated. He also, allowed the Philistines to get emerods and killed off when it was in their possession. Do you think the story of the Ethiopians carrying the Ark of the Covenant to Ethiopia without any notion in the story showing if any Levis carried it or not would standup to scrutiny? The Holy Bible has things like these covered. Small details of tribes, people and locations are in the Holy Bible which allows it to stand up to scrutiny. Even Uzziah was breached upon during the time when it was recaptured to the rightful owners! In other words, no one was allowed to touch or handle the Ark of the Covenant unless he was a consecrated Levi. The holiness and what it represented would not allow any other.
So, when the Ethiopians claim that they had the Ark and that some have descended from the tribe of Judah (one example, Menelik I), I have to wonder. Also, when Israel was scattered to Africa and some parts of Europe, they carried certain patterns of how they designed things. I am aware that some of their things changed along the way. However, they always had their royal buildings with columns that had flowery capitals with their petals folding downward. Their scepter had a round globular tip, they had their bricks pale or white in color stacked together in order or they had it where they used gray stones piled upon each other almost looking like an altar built as walls (some good examples are the wall in Zimbabwe and the ancient walls in Ireland). Old royal buildings of the highest degree found in Ghana reflect certain traits of these.
This king has what looks like a “caveman’s” club with prongs sticking out of it to bash people with. His beads look of course Hamitic African (they could be pearls—not sure), even his crown is different from how the Israelites who used metals to make their crowns. Something should reflect that he is of Hebrew descent. I read the bottom which does have in detail his lineage. However, I still wonder. The Ethiopians, to me, are notorious in fibbing concerning the things of Israel. However, there is one positive thing is that a copy of the Book of Enoch translated in their language was found in order to be translated into other languages.
Uzza was encroached on for trying to stabilize the Ark of the Covenant.
I just have to add that I read the story of the Kebra Nagast where a small portion concerning the “Ark of the Covenant” was displayed on some site a while ago. So, off of that, is where I interpreted that there was no mention of a Levite in the story. I was able to read the whole story about the “Ark” recently. However, the story still does not line up or complement the Holy Bible. The story seems to have a Roman Catholic influence to it.
In Chapter 33 it states, “Only give us the fringes of the covering of the holy heavenly ZION, the Tabernacle of the Law of God, which we would embrace (or, greet).”
Also, Chapter 51 states, ‘now on the fringes are figures of gold that came forth from the land of ?ÂDÊS, which MOSES in SINAI commanded should be made (or, worked) in the fringe of the apparel of AARON his brother—gather [all these] together in the covering of ZION and give [them] to my son DAVID. For his mother said in [her] message by TÂMRÎN her servant, ‘Give us some of the fringe of the covering of ZION, so that we may worship it, we and those who are in subjection unto us and all our kingdom.’ And now, give it to him, and say unto him, ‘Take [and] worship this covering of ZION, for thy mother sent a message concerning this, and hath said unto thee thyself, ‘Give us some of the fringe of its covering, which we can worship, so that we may not, like the heathen, worship another [god].’’
For chapter 33, the only thing that had fringes applied to was the borders of the people’s garment. Numbers 15: 38 and 39 show this. There were no fringes applied to the covering of, what the Kebra calls, the “ZION” which I am assuming is the Ark of the Covenant.
Chapter 51 attempts to explain where the fringes came from because as I stated previously that the fringes were applied to the borders of the people’s garment. Aaron’s and his sons’ garments did not have fringes at the hem. The High Priest’s had pomegranates of alternating colors of blue, purple, red and the metal gold around his hem. Also, wires of gold were woven in each of those colors within the cloth. Yahweh does not allow for anyone to worship an item He commanded to make. They were symbolisms of His Kingdom.
Further it states, ‘This He said because the LEVITES had esteemed Him lightly. And say unto him: Take this covering of ZION, and this votive gift shall be in the place of it, and place it in thy sanctuary.’
The wording used or translation sounds Roman Catholic. When I read the word “votive”, I thought of candles. When I thought of candles, I thought of how there are many candles in the cathedral where people go to pray and light one in honor or in remembrance of a love one.
“Supplicatory” or “prayerful” are synonyms to the word “votive”.
Chapter 48 reveals, ‘And behold, the Angel of the Lord appeared again to AZÂRYÂS and he stood up above him like a pillar of fire, and he filled the house with his light. And he raised up AZÂRYÂS and said unto him, “Stand up, be strong, and rouse up thy brother ÊLM?YÂS, and ’AB?SÂ, and MÂKARÎ, and take the pieces of wood and I will open for thee the doors of the sanctuary. And take thou the Tabernacle of the Law of God, and thou shalt carry it without trouble and discomfort. And I, inasmuch as I have been commanded by God to be with it for ever, will be thy guide when thou shalt carry it away.”’
This is very contradictory to the way Yahweh works. He would never tell any of His Israelites to carry off the Ark of the Covenant just because some of them are commanded to go to another country with a king when Israel, the nation was not in exile! According to the Kebra, King Solomon was still the king of Israel and the nation itself was not in any real danger. They had no rights to take the “Ark of the Covenant”. Besides, Yahweh would allow the priests to hide it in the land of Israel than to make it go off in another land.
There are many many more discrepancies throughout the Kebra Nagast.
You are ignorant, judgmental and biased. You think you can interpret one book because you have a small understanding of another. If you want answers, try reading without your predisposed dissatisfaction. Read with an open mind. I agree that it reads as something that has been touched up by the powers that be. But how in the world are you able to endlessly point that out in the Kebra Nagast and forget to mention that the entire religion was changed by the powers that be. You’re using flawed vision to look at something flawed. Talk to God instead of overexciting yourself over a bunch dudes that neither of us will ever meet.
Scripture cannot be broken but sure as heck has been altered.