Wrong Knowledge

Right Knowledge Gone Wrong
Hits: 438
Rating:

Ask The Nuwaupians, Was Kish of Mesopotamia the Kush/Cush of the Bible?

User Rating: 4 / 5

Star ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar Inactive
 

Question: Ask The Nuwaupians, Was Kish of Mesopotamia the Kush/Cush of the Bible?

Answer: According to their teacher Malachi York Kish and Kush were one and the same.

 Demonstration Beats Conversation

The following article will show in no uncertain terms that Malachi York and his parroting cult members are clueless on a plethora of topics related to the ancient world, be it Nile Valley Civilizations, or civilizations in the Fertile Crescent region. 

Taken from York's The Black Book Chapter 1 No. 2 Kish being Kush is a belief that's held not only by Nuwaupians, but other misinformed ideologues. 

 

The simple answer to this question is NO, Kish and Kush were not the same.  Anyone doing real research, and not some lazy form of synonym-word play would see the difference.

 ๐’‰† ๐’ˆ—nam-lugal (the Sumerian Kings List) mentions the kiš dynasty, this is an important primary source on the chronology of kiš (Kish). 
 
๐’‚• ๐’€€ ๐’ˆ  ๐’Š’ ๐’€ ๐’ƒก ๐’Š ๐’‹ซ
๐’‰† ๐’ˆ— ๐’€ญ ๐’‹ซ ๐’‡ฏ๐’บ ๐’‰ˆ ๐’€€ ๐’€
๐’†ง ๐’†  ๐’‰† ๐’ˆ— ๐’†ท

ejer a-ma-ru ba-ur3-ra-ta

nam-lugal an-ta ed3-de-a-ba.

kiš-ki nam-lugal

After the flood had swept over the land and kingship had (once again) descended from the sky, the (seat of) kingship was in the city of kiš.

-The Sumerian Kings list tablet one; lines 40-42  

The Sumerian Kings list informs us that kiš-ki was the first dynasty to rule after a flooding of the area.  And the first dynasty of Ur (located at modern Tell el-Muqayyar in southern Iraq) became a city State upon the defeat of the Kiš which archaeologists have dated to circa the 26th century BC which lasted from the year 2600 BC to 2501 BC in ancient Sumer.  It was preceded by the earlier first dynasty of Kiš and first dynasty of Unug (Uruk).

The Sumerian Kings list also states that the last ruler of the first dynasty ๐’ˆ—๐’† ๐’‚… Lugal-ki-tun3 of Unug (Uruk) was overthrown by the Urim king Mesh-Ane-pada; bringing about the dynasty of ๐’‹€๐’€•๐’†  Urim-ki (Ur).  Then Unug was defeated, and the kingship was taken to Urim-ki (Ur).

There were only four documented kings that ruled Urim-ki (Ur) in the official kings list making this the first dynasty of Ur.

๐’ˆฉ๐’€ญ๐’‰Œ๐’…†๐’Š’๐’• Mesh-Ane-pada

๐’ˆฉ๐’† ๐’‰˜๐’‰ฃ Mesh-ki-ang-Nuna

๐’‚Š๐’‡ป๐’‡ป Elulu

๐’€๐’‡ป๐’‡ป Balulu

Unfortunately, with the biblical myths, there has never been a Sumerian ruling list to verify as historical by archaeological excavations, epigraphical excavations,  epigraphical lexicon inscriptions or otherwise for old testament patriarchs like Abraham. 

๐’†ง๐’†  kiš-ki - ๐’†ช๐’Œ‹๐’‹› Ku-u-si

(Kish & Kush)

 We find no evidence whatsoever linking kiš (Kish) of Mesopotamia with that of the people known as kš (Kash) "Kushites" of north Africa and the bible.  
 
 
At the time when Rome was a small village on the banks of the Tiber and Greek city states were sway of miniscule territories, the Kushites rules an empire stretching from the central Sudan to the borders of Palestine.  The Kingdom of Kush outlived the Greek city states and the period of Macedonian hegemony over the vast tracts of the ancient world, and co-existed with the rise, heyday and period of decline of the Roman Empire.
-The Roots of Nubian Christianity Uncovered: The Triumph of the Last Pharaoh by Dr. Salim Faraji page 64
 
 
The kingdom of /kš/ "Kush" was NOT the /kiš/ dynasty of Sumer, here's why.
Kish was an ancient Mesopotamian city-state located east of Babylon in what's now south-central Iraq. 
This dynasty ended when its last king of the first dynasty ๐’€๐’‚ต Ag-ga was defeated circa 2660 by Gilgameš king of the first dynasty of Uruk.  Although kiš continued to be important throughout most of ancient Mesopotamian history, it was never able to regain its earlier prominence.

The inscriptions on the Rassam cylinder of Assur-Bani-pal mentions his first Egyptian war (667 BCE) there he specifically identifies the king of /kmT/ (Egypt) Taharqa king of both Egypt and Kush.  This is important because they specifically identify by name kur-ku-u-si (kš) and NOT/kiš/.

      ๐’‹ป ๐’„ฃ ๐’Œ‘ Tar-qu-u2 t๊œฃ-h-rw-k Taharka

       ๐’†ณ ๐’ˆฌ ๐’€ซ Kur-Mu-zur /kmT/ (Egypt)

๐’†ณ ๐’‹ข ๐’Œ‹ ๐’‹› kur-Ku-u-si /kš/ Kush

(erroneously referred to as Ethiopia in early translations)

There is your answer: it's simple, it's in the names.  In English one can play the pseudo-linguistic game, however when checking the primary sources, how the Mesopotamians recorded it and their meanings, eliminates any word play.  The book of Genesis is irrelevant to the historical records.  As stated earlier the Assur-Bani-pal inscription of the first Egyptian War mentions specifically the king of Egypt who was at the time Taharqa: the king of both Egypt and Kush. 
 
 
๐’„ฟ ๐’ˆพ ๐’ˆค ๐’Š‘ ๐’‚Š ๐’ƒป ๐’Š‘ ๐’‰ฟ ๐’€€ ๐’ˆพ ๐’ˆ  ๐’ƒถ

๐’ˆช ๐’ˆ› ๐’„ฉ ๐’‡ป ๐’Œ‹ ๐’€  ๐’Œจ ๐’‹ป ๐’„ฃ ๐’Œ‘ ๐’Šฌ ๐’ˆฌ ๐’€ซ

๐’€€ ๐’ ๐’€ ๐’‰ก ๐’Œ‹ ๐’€€ ๐’‹ข ๐’„‘ ๐’†ช ๐’‰ก
 
๐’†ณ ๐’ฎ ๐’‹ข ๐’Œ‹ ๐’‹ป ๐’„ฃ ๐’Œ‘
 
i-na-maแธซ-re-e gar-ri ya a-na ma-gan
va mi-luแธซ-แธซa lu-u-al-lik tar-qu-u2 แนฃar mu-zur 
abu ba-nu-u a abikta su is-ku-nu va
mat แนฃu va su-u tar-qu-u2
 
In my first expedition to Makan I went, Tirhakah king of Egypt and Ethiopia, [of whom Esar-had-don king of Assyria] the father my begetter, his overthrow had accomplished and had taken possession of Egypt
-Cylinder A: Column I lines 51- Column 11 line 59
 This Egyptian Assyrian war was well documented in Assyrian literature, even celebrated; beginning with Assurbanipal's father Esarhaddon; who kidnapped members of Taharqa's family as seen below with his son.
 
 
Above is the captured son of Taharqa; Ushankhuru taken from the Victory Stele of Esarhaddon, 671 BCE located in the Pergamon Museum Berlin, Germany
 
 Of Tirhakah, king of Egypt and Kush...I slew multitudes of his men, and he I smote five times with the point of javelin, with wounds no recovery.  Memphis, his royal, in half a day, with mines, tunnels, assaults, I besieged, I captured, I destroyed, I devastated, I burned with fire, his queen, his harem, Ushanhkuru, his heir, and the rest of his sons and daughters, his property and his goods, his horses, his cattle, his sheep, in countless numbers, I carried off to Assyria.  The root of Kush I tore up out of Egypt and not one therein escaped to submit to me
-Victory Stele of Esarhaddon line 580 
Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylon by Daniel D. Luckenbill, Ph.D Professor of the Semitic Languages and Literatures in the University of Chicago Vol. II Historical Records of Assyria from Sargon to the End
 
 
 The overall point here is that the kingdoms of Kush were not the kingdoms of Kish as the Victory Stele of Esarhaddon makes so vividly clear. The kingdom of Kish was never at war with Esarhaddon.
 
 
 What the Nuwaupians needs to do is ask themselves, how long will you continue to follow a man whose teachings has been consistently proven to be falacious and Pseudo?
 

On a Side note: One outspoken and very misinformed Nuwaupian cult member who goes by the pseudonym "Amun Numa" alias "Kedar" is on record parroting this twisted belief of the Nuwaupians. 

In his regurgitation of York's misinformation; without a single line of textual nor archaeological support; he reads from the second Black Book page 293, having no clue on what in the world he's reading, nor the level of falsehoods he's spreading. 

"...then you had the dynastic Egiptians, which started when the Pharaoh Menes who is also called Mizraim in your bible (Genesis 10:6), a Khemite or Kemet who came to Egipt from SUMER!!! [the emphasis was his while reading] and took control of both upper and lower Egipt..."

Now I can elaborate more on this as well, and easily debunk this junk found in the Black Book II (maybe in the next article).  But someone share this article with the our good brother who means well, but his faith in the teachings of York is unfortunately for him, in vain.

Menes (Narmer) was NOT a Sumerian. He did NOT travel from southern Iraq (Sumer) under the biblical name Mizram and took control of upper and lower Egipt.  Maybe that's true in fantasy land because York does utilize the word "EGIPT" and not "EGYPT" for HIS version of history; in other words, it's not based on reality nor the historical records, however, it may be true in the pseudo-theology of Malachi York, be-lie-eved hook-line and sinker by his followers the Nuwaupians.

And (with all due respect) don't even think of jumping to the Narmer Pallett, NOTHING on it suggests any links to ancient Sumer, NO inscription, NO iconography. Maybe you should seek out an ancient Sumerian or ancient Egyptian inscription that mentions Menes/Narmer departing ancient Sumer for ancient Egypt, possibly that would be a start or something to aid you in your defense of your "master teacher's" pseudo doctrine.

 

 

 

 

 

About Nuwaupianism

Website containing 360 questions to ask Nuwaupians.

Expose' detailing the doctrine of Malachi York.

Search