Talk:Book of Gates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ancient Egypt / Egyptian religion  (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Egyptian religion work group (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Religious texts (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a joint subproject of WikiProject Religion and WikiProject Books, and a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religious texts-related subjects. Please participate by editing this article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Error in Three ethnic groups[edit]

The Metu Neter associated with three ethnic groups has been mistranslated and should be corrected.

Here we have and example of mixing up truth with falsehood. The classical Africans of Kemet (Egypt) did produce the first ethnographic studies but they had no word for “race”. Yet the author talks as if such a concept existed, it did not, and he offers no proof that it did exist. I personally have never seen or heard of any word in the 10,000 year history of metu neter, (hieroglyphics) for “race”.

The Kemetic people do not ‘identify four “races” ‘ in this ethnographic study from the time of Seti I in the book of Gates. They do identify three major ethnic groups and two Nationalities. Blacks are shown by nationality Kemetian (Egyptian) and Nubian. The other two ethnic groups are Caucasian (White) and Multi-ethnic (Semitic).

There is also an Ethnographic study from the time of Ramosis II that deliniates three major ethnic groups and Two Nationalities. The study precisely notes the Kemetic nationality as belonging to the Black ethnic group. So the first ethnographic studies in recorded history, c. 1500 - 1200 B.C.E., delineate the three major ethnic groups Blacks, Asians and lastly Whites/Semites. Despite the invention of the word “race” some approximately 2,700 years later. I have seen no evidence to invalidate the Cultural Health Golden Rule (There is one race the human race and many ethnic groups) established by the first sociologists in recorded history.

To see a copy of a early ethnographic study from the time of Rameses II c. 1200 B.C.E. [Click Here http://aunk123.googlepages.com/home] . This link will take you to the Cultural Health Training Center. Scroll down the page until you come to the “African American Cultural Literacy Section. Start the video clip 3.35 minutes in you will see the ethnographic study and the professor’s explanation.

--Aunk (talk) 04:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Usual afrocentrist baloney. The word 'race' historically is inclusive of ethnicity and the claim that Nubians and Egyptians are somehow the same race is as arbitary as saying that the Asiatics and Egyptians are the same race. Either apply their categories or modern categories. We can't jumble them up. Paul B (talk) 11:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


Lake of fire?[edit]

This page makes reference and links to lake of fire, but after looking at both pages, I don't really see the rationale for linking to this particular page. The lake of fire article is referring to a distinctly Christian concept, and there doesn't appear to be any connection between it and ancient Egypt. If the Book of Gates actually refers to a lake of fire specifically, then this really should either be put in as a quote or the lake of fire article should be expanded to reflect this interpretation or both. I don't know enough about the topic to feel right in moving forward on this on my own, but I do feel the need to bring it up. --Jt (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)