The Ancient Black Hebrews Vol III: The Genetic Evidence

The true Hebrews of the Bible do not practice Judaism which is a counterfeit of the Bible. This book did a great job summarizing the real Hebrews of the Bible verses the counterfeit ones pretending to be the Hebrews of the Bible. The Star of David is the star of molech a demon. David does not have a star and his shield is TMH. That star is used in high occultist witchcraft. When the real Hebrews return to the land it will look like the garden of eden, there will be no war, the Messiah will bring the remenant back himself and the Messiah hasn’t returned yet. Revelation chapter 6 says when the Messiah comes the stars will fall from the sky, all the mountains and islands will move out of place and the sky will roll back like a scroll. That hasn’t happened yet so who are these people lying and claiming to be the Hebrews of the Bible and they are not. Do not adopt the ways of Judaism as it is a false religion just like all the other religions. Follow the Bible without false doctrines of religion

Gert Muller is a free-lance journalist's investigator and has been for 20 years in Southern Africa and Britain. He has been researching the history of Africans in the Asia and Biblical history for just as long. He has carried out investigative research for many articles that have appeared in such world-wide publications as West Africa magazine. He has worked with such notable journalists as Anu M'Bantu and such world-renowned historical authors as Robin Walker. He wrote in the Introduction to this 2018 book, “History uses evidence from a variety of disciplines to paint a picture of what happened. Traditionally this comes from archaeology, written accounts and oral traditions. In the first two volumes of ‘The Ancient Black Hebrews’ we used these traditional forms of evidence to make our case. Now we shall use genetic evidence mainly from populations still practicing Hebraic religion to demonstrate who the ancient Hebrews were. We shall also look at who the ancestors of the Hebrews were according to genetics. Crucially, in addition to that, we shall review evidence that appears to contradict our position. We shall also be clear about what the genetic evidence says and does not say. We concluded in the previous two volumes that the ancient Hebrews were Black. The genetic evidence, however, shall be viewed without assumption of what it should reveal.” (Pg. 6) He acknowledges, “There is a lot of confusion in relation to Biblical terms like ‘Israelite’ and ‘Jew.’ … The term ‘Israelite’ refers to descendants of the Biblical character Jacob, whose other name was Israel. This means that the Patriarchs before Jacob; Isaac and Abraham, cannot be classed as Israelites. Israelite is an ethnic term centered on descent. In its primary sense it is not a religious term… If a Jew is someone who follows the Torah, and the Torah came about in the time of Moses, then Abraham cannot be described as a ‘Jew.’ We could, however, describe him as a Hebrew because this refers to descendants of the Biblical character Eber, who predates Abraham. However, there is a problem even in describing Moses as his Israelite followers as ‘Jews.’ Why? Because the term is derived from ‘Yehudi’ or ‘inhabitant of Judah.’ In the Old Testament after the death of Solomon the kingdom of Israel splits into two kingdoms… When only the kingdom of Judah remained being an Israelite and being a ‘Yehudi’ became synonymous. Before the destruction of northern Israel, it would be anachronistic to use the term ‘Jew’ to describe Israelites in general. We can call the surviving Israelites from the 7th century BC onwards Biblical Jews… The followers of modern Judaism are Talmudic Jews.” (Pg. 7-8) He explains, “Is there such a thing as ‘race’? The best way to investigate a concept is to define it… In zoology a race is a sub-group, within a species, whose defining characteristics are absolute… Let us look at this practice. The term ‘Negroid’ was coined to refer to people of Sub-Saharan appearance heavily pigmented skin, full lips, broad nose and tightly curled hair. There is no problem with this so long as the category is not treated as a zoological race. This is because the category is NOT absolute. In every ‘Negroid’ population there will be a minority who do not have thick lips. There will also be a minority who do not have broad noses… There will also be a minority who have an Afro of a somewhat looser texture or whose complexion is lighter than average. We do not conclude that they belong to a different ‘race’ simply because their lips are not thick enough, their nose is not broad enough or their skin is not dark enough… There is more variety within a given regional category than there is between the regional categories. For example, there is more variety in the wideness of nose amongst Europeans than there is between Europeans and Africans. The same is true for other traits… in place of terms like ‘Negroid,’ ‘Caucasoid’ and ‘Mongoloid’ we prefer to use the term s Sub-Saharan, European and East Asian appearance.” (Pg. 20-22) He continues, “Most people do not realize that there is a difference between ‘ethnicity’ and ‘race.’ ‘Ethnicity’ is based on sharing language and cultural customs. ‘Race’ is essentially climate-based differences in appearance common to people indigenous to that geo-region.;; A population can change their climate-based appearance without changing their ethnicity. There are three main ways in which this can happen. The ancient Egyptians of 2000 BC were depicted uniformly of African complexion but those of 100 BC were shown both pale and dark… This was due to two millennia of West Asian and European immigration. They kept their ethnicity, within those dates, but significantly changed their climate-based appearance. Only when the Egyptians lost their language did they lose their ethnicity.” (Pg. 22-23) He notes, “humans started in East Africa before a single group crossed into Asia to become the ancestors of ALL non-Africans. Every European… Asian… Melanesian and Native American descends from this small group of East Africans. From a genetic point of view all people who descend from this group are closer to each other than they are to Sub-Saharans… This is the case even if the non-Africans are themselves of approximate Sub-Saharan appearance… a Black person from Papua New Guinea is genetically CLOSER to an East Asian or a European than he is to a Black person from Sub-Saharan Africa. It is not about whether you look similar but whether you share a more recent ancestry.” (Pg. 25) He states, “Adam and Eve are East Africans and it is the existence of White people that needs to be explained in the context of a Black Adam and Eve. In this same way an assumption has also been made about the whiteness of the ancient Hebrews. The assumption of whiteness has influenced the way genetic studies have been carried out and interpreted.” (Pg. 26) He points out, “The Biblical origins of humanity in East Africa smashes assumptions. The scientific origins of humanity in East Africa smashes the same set of assumptions but in a scientific arena. If humanity originated in East Africa it must have started off Black. Since East Africans crossed into Asia to become the ancestors of all non-Africans these ancestors must have been Black too… Only much later did they become of European and East Asian appearance in northern latitudes. That is why there are many regions outside Africa that have indigenous populations as dark as Sub-Saharans and sometimes with other accompanying features.” (Pg. 27-28) He summarizes, “Evidence from the genetics of modern Jews from the Old World shows that they have inherited ancestry from two types of African-complexioned populations. The main ancestry is from aboriginal West Asians who resembled a type that occurs amongst tribal Indian populations… Those in the southern parts of West Asia, Like Israel, were the last to be affected by mixing with paler northern peoples. This evidence explains the Biblical descriptions of ancient Hebrews from the Old Testament, indicating African appearance.” (Pg. 54-55) He cautions, “the presence of Hebraic groups in Sub-Saharan Africa does not tell us anything about the appearance of the ancient Hebrews just like the presence of Jews in Europe does not tell us anything about the same either.” (Pg. 65) He concludes, “There are a number of observations we can make based on the genetic studies on Hebraic groups and West Asians in general. Linguistic logic strongly suggests the ancestors of the Hebrews and other Semitic speakers came from East Africa. These pre-Proto-Semitic speakers mixed with the African-complexioned aboriginal peoples of West Asia they found there. During the ancient period pale-complexioned peoples came from the north and mixed into the dark peoples of the south… The ancient people of Judah and the Arabs were amongst the last predominantly African complexioned populations in West Asia. The descendants of the people of Judah were the Jews who migrated to Babylon after the Exile… to Europe after the destruction of Jerusalem… and to North African at the same date. Some Jews obviously made it to Sub-Saharan Africa … Many geneticists seem reluctant to admit this… We can only conclude experts are reluctant to admit this for the same reason they are reluctant to admit that the ancient Israelites were a people of African appearance. We are happy to have played our part in the correction of this misconception.” (Pg. 101-102) This book will be “must reading” for those interested in the ethnicity of the people of the Bible.

I shall enjoy reading this book.

Interesting and Informative

Great information and easy to follow .

It was in great condition and had no defects whatsoever! Thank you for having great content like this in stock! I am ecstatic about that part the most! Great work!

This was a quick read. Lots of references.

This book came in excellant condition

Gert Muller is a professional writer in this subject!