Asar Imhotep invalid claim of Hebrews in Kemet

(Follow-up article: Asar Imhotep weak scholarship)

Asar Imhotep is the author of the Books “The Bakala of North America (The Living Suns of Vitality)” and the E-Book “Passion of Christ or Passion of Osiris” (The Kongo Origins of the Jesus Myth).

He is a regular participant of "Ghetto Scholarship"
on the "Black Means Death" Squad.

I had my first exchange with him back in August 2010 on a BlogtalkRadio show, which can be heard in the video (at the bottom) from the start to minute 12:50.
The second exchange happened on another radio show.

Meaning of the word Hebrew: Let’s first look at the definition of the word:

Online Etymology Dictionary:
late O.E., from O.Fr. Ebreu, from L. Hebraeus, from Gk. Hebraios, from Aramaic 'ebhrai, corresponding to Heb. 'ibhri "an Israelite," lit. "one from the other side," in reference to the River Euphrates, or perhaps simply signifying "immigrant;" from 'ebher "region on the other or opposite side." Derogatory slang shortening Hebe is first recorded 1932.

Britannica Encyclopaedia:
Hebrew, any member of an ancient northern Semitic people that were the ancestors of the Jews. Historians use the term Hebrews to designate the descendants of the patriarchs of the Old Testament (i.e., Abraham, Isaac, and so on) from that period until their conquest of Canaan (Palestine) in the late 2nd millennium bc. Thenceforth these people are referred to as Israelites until their return from the Babylonian Exile in the late 6th century bc, from which time on they became known as Jews.
In the Bible the patriarch Abraham is referred to a single time as the ivri, ...

Webster's Dictionary:
Definition of HEBREW
1 a : the Semitic language of the ancient Hebrews
b : any of various later forms of this language
2 : a member of or descendant from one of a group of northern Semitic peoples including the Israelites; especially : israelite

Origin of HEBREW
Middle English Ebreu, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin Hebraeus, from Latin, adjective, from Greek Hebraios, from Aramaic ?Ebrai
First Known Use: 13th century

All 3 meanings define the Hebrews as Israelites.
Therefore, Hebrew does not simply mean “nomad” but Israelite, besides the word “nomad” doesn’t even appear in the definitions.

I doubt that anyone will argue whether or not the term “Israelite” is to be considered as a people of the Theological Bible story. So claiming that there was “Hebrews in Kemet” is not just alleging the existence of “random” nomadic people, but it implies the presence of the so-called chosen people of Yahweh (Jehovah) in ancient Egypt, as narrated in the Old Testament (Torah otherwise called Pentateuch).

In the first exchange (July 2010) I was surprised to hear Asar Imhotep saying that the “Hebrews are Egyptians” (minute 02:00) so I questioned him on that asking for records…
Asar Imhotep then proceeded to do some linguistic "demonstration", ultimately saying that the “Apiru” (Hapiru) is the same word as “Eber” and that the later was a general term that means “nomad”…

I will note, but not comment on the claim that “the 42 nomes of Egypt were 42 different ethnic groups” (10:12).

As for the second exchange (April 2011, from minute 12:50), the disagreement (or “debate” if you will) centers around the same issue, since I previously heard Asar Imhotep make similar claims repeatedly on the same show, I took the chance to ask again for clarification while I had the opportunity.
You will notice that there was a slight misunderstanding; because I was calling from overseas, I misheard “Afaru” instead of “Apiru”, even though I asked twice for clarification on the spelling I wasn’t heard on that detail.
So I though that Asar Imhotep had some “new” type of claim, this time “Afaru” being Hebrews and I was trying to find more about these alledged “Afaru” but little did I know that we were talking about the same “Apiru”.

This leads us back to the 1st exchange we had, because my position is that words have a meaning and that meanings are not interchangeable just like letters through different languages (“b” & “p”, “p” & “f” or “p” and “v”, “r” & “l”)…
Thus Hebrews cannot be defined outside the Biblical literature (Theology, not History).
So if anyone tries to affirmatively argue the Historicity of Hebrews, this cannot be done while disregarding the accounts of the Bible (Exodus narrative). On the other hand, if the Biblical narrative is not Historical, how and why would their protagonists be?

Considering that different populations have more or less similar words to denote “nomads” (or pastoral people) is not a problem, especially on the same continent and a particularly defined area (Northern part of Africa). However it has been demonstrated that the word Hebrew itself does not simply mean “nomad”.

Further note:
Can we accept claims from scholars & writers (Historians, Doctors, Linguists) who would make linguistic comparisons from a Theological (non historical) people and apply it to later (Historical) populations?

Despite their alleged academic, scholarly and “impartial” methodology, are we sure that their eventual faith don’t get in the way of their reasoning and claims?

Can we accept a people’s existence, on linguistic basis, over physical evidence?

Would it be surprising that different populations (ethnic groups if you will) being Judeo-Christianized and Islamic or not would have words in their own language corresponding to the people mentioned in the Bible (Torah & New Testament) and the Qur’an?

Can anybody re-define words (their meaning) in order to suit their claim?

As far as I’m concerned, one word can answer these 4 questions: NO.

CONCLUSION: “Apiru” might mean “nomad”, but “Hebrew” don’t mean nomad.
Claiming that there were nomads in ancient Egypt is valid, but claiming that there was Hebrews in ancient Egypt on the pretence that “Hebrew” means “nomad” is invalid.
Hebrews denotes a specific type of people, and their story is so far a matter of Theology.

Before arguing the presence of the Hebrews anywhere in time, their historicity must be established first. Establishing the presence of nomads does not establish the historicity of Hebrews, just like establishing the historicity of Pontius Pilate does not prove the historicity of Jesus Christ (Yeshua). Acknowledging the existence of Christians in the year 2001 does not prove the existence of Jesus Christ in the 1st century ace.

Asar Imhotep invalid claim of Hebrews in Kemet

(Follow-up article: Asar Imhotep weak scholarship)

Advice for the neophytes:
History cannot be dealt without Archaeology, on your Path to Thoroughness you should always seek in order of preference (if available) the primary source (original), the oldest copy, the oldest reference.

* Your record/copy/reference should be as close as possible to the period in question.
* Reading a book is not “doing research” (homework), checking the references is a start.
* Be very cautious when people make claims then ask you to look for the evidences. (i.e. tell you to read a whole book)
* Be very cautious when people make long replies without answering the question.
* Better than quoting authors is the ability to cite primary sources.
* Never make a rule out of an exception.
* One of the most clever thing to say is “I don’t know”.

4W’s : Who, When, What, Where?
How & Why tend to be subjective...

Shaka-Ndugu-KMT ( April 14, 2011

Update December 6, 2014 (Facebook link, click here)

Transparency. You said from your own mouth that you would write a paper (more than once if I am not mistaken), while I did write to refute your irresponsible claims and you have failed to keep your word since 2011. Do not be surprised if you are labelled a fraud by your "peers".

This is not personal, I've done the same thing with Dr. Wesley Muhammad who also backed down from the public debate that he challenged me to and later agreed to on the phone and via email.
Therefore you are not alone.

You never had the inteliigence and the integrity to address any text to me following our specific conversation. Which shows the difference between me and you.

I am glad that you have responded, because you will not be able to say that you were unaware of my 2 articles refuting your claims. And by the way, one of them (at least) was once read live on the air during one of the Amen-Ra Squad show.

You have sadly underestimated me, and now I have total evidence that you have knowledge of my articles, I never expected anything from you in the first place. My credibility is impeccable, yours is laughable.

You can take neophytes lightly, but you had a life lesson and an academic demonstration of what happens when you are being disingenuous with an logical researcher that has an efficient method, and a common sense that you are lacking.

Asar Imhotep: “What you have to understand is that the people had to exist in order for them to even write the book, regardless of how you feel they had to exist, you know to write the book […] Whatever argument anybody’s trying to make that these people didn’t exist, you have to argue; ok who wrote this?” […]
“ So they wrote the book, you know, regardless if all of the information is fake or not”
(end of quote)

You are spreading misinformation and falsehood to our people, and you don't even have the integrity to stand by your own words, I could say "shame on you" but it is to the point where it's getting pitiful.
In your own words: "you are not making any sense".
For the record, I deal with historical facts scholastically, so if you ever in your life get enough courage to be responsible, then you will know better than expecting a fellow scholar to be aware of your untitled "material in which certain claims were made". This is not a scholastic response, and I am not asking for any, I am merely being cautious enough to notify you, so that if I ever address your nonsencial so-called scholarship, I won't be speculating.

You'll know better next time you claim that there were Hebrews in Kemet.
You'll know better next time you claim that the Hebrews were Egyptians.
You'll know better next time you claim that Allah is in the Egyptian text.
Allah is an Arabic word, the contraction of al-Ilah, meaning “the God”, at the time of Ancient Egypt, the Arabic language wasn't in existence yet.

I have been kind enough and patient enough, from now on every communication that I have with you, including this Facebook message exchange will be made in public.
Consider yourself warned.

That was in the spirit of Ma'at.

Signed: Shaka-Ndugu-KMT,


Deception of Asiatic Black Men
White Semites : Black Awakening

New Testament - Curse of Ham - Lynching - Lynchings : pictures - Maat (Ma'at) - Bible : contradictions
Black Code - Eminem racist song - Coloured man - Wesley Muhammad refuted - Gandhi - Moor means BLACK
Medu Neter : origine of the Greek & Latin alphabets
Nation of Islam : teachings of Elijah Muhammad, Louis Farrakhan & Fard Muhammad
Wesley Muhammad refuted Black Arabia hoax & the African Origin of Islam myth | Shaka-Ndugu-KMT