A LIGHT SHINING IN THE DARKNESS
MOSES' ETHIOPIAN WIFE
- The Ethiopian Midianite? -
But She Is NOT Also A Midianitess!
“Fictitious Truths” is the term I use for truths I encounter in works of fiction. In a Frank Herbert Dune novel I was engrossed by one called The Babylon Problem: The omnipresent dangers of achieving wrong combinations from accurate information.
He included no clear examples of any and I couldn’t think of a scenario in which one could be envisioned. Until I was faced with the enigma of Moses’ Ethiopian wife. From Exodus 2:21-22 & Numbers 12:1 we arrive at a combination of conclusions: (1) The Midianite is also an Ethiopian, or (2) Moses married two different women. However, in drawing these conclusions we also presume that it’s the same Moses. That combination is wrong! The conundrum of Moses' wife can only be solved by first disambiguating the correlation between Midianite & Ethiopian. But how does one do that and find the correct solution to the Babylon Problem? By interpreting the “accurate” info from a combination of perspectives. For example:
A Moses married a Midianite + A Moses married an Ethiopian = 2 Moseses. One who married a Midianite, and another who married an Ethiopian.
Though the perspective of the info has been changed, the integrity of its accuracy has been preserved.
But can it be proved? Yes!
1 Ah-MOSE(S) I married an Ethiopian + 1 Thut-MOSE(S) IV married a Midianite*, which is a Demotic [MiD-AN-i] metathesis [MiD-i-AN] of Egyptian MeT-AN-i [(i.e., Mitanni. PROVING Midian Is Mitanni). It was the marriage of this princess to Thutmose IV that sealed the peace treaty between Egypt and Mitanni c. 1397-1388 BC]. Except for her title, The Noble Lady of Naharin (T Spst Nhrn), no one is yet certain of the name of the Mitanni Princess, though her Biblical name Zipporah seems to give an alternate rendering of the Mitanni title: Zp pr ah ("Noble [one from the] house [of] Iah" (Per Ah), or "[of the] Great House?). THARBIS, though, was a fiction concocted by Josephus. On the other hand, there's absolutely no doubt about the identity of Moses' historical Ethiopian wife: Ahmose Nefertari. What was the reason for Aaron's & Miriams's animosity toward her?
​​
Demotic was used during the Ptolemaic Rule of Egypt, when the LXX was written. 'S' was also transliterated as 'Z' [E.g., Zion (2 Sam. 5:7), and Sion (Deut. 4:48)]. What I just demonstrated is simply a heuristic application of my THEOPHORIC THEORY.
​
* To my knowledge, no images of Mitanni or Midianite princesses have yet been conclusively identified in Egyptian iconography --- that the public has been made aware of. And it would be completely futile to seek for any in ancient Jewish imagery, since historically verified depictions of the Biblical Israelites themselves cannot be found! I can, however, present you with an image of a male Naharina (the Egyptian word for a person associated with the land of Mitanni), and by process of elimination, present the only logical choice for the Egyptian name and image of the Midianitess. Thutmose IV had 3 wives: Iaret, Nefertari, and Mutemwiya. Iaret was his sister, so we can rule her out. My money is on Mutemwiya. What's more, by realizing that Midian is actually a variant of Mitanni, we expose the historical fabrication that claims Midian to be the son of Abraham and the fictitious Keturah. But why interpolate such falsehood? [Author's opinion: Apparently, to provide an alternate definition of Ethiopian. A Semitic one, to distinguish it from the historical Ethiopians with Black roots in Africa! Yet, once again, the redactors are betrayed by their ignorance of the Egyptian language and the ancient Egyptian word for Ethiopian --- Nehes and Nhsyw. And didn't realize, until it was too late, that Phinehas** meant The "Black" / "Nubian" / "CUSHITE" / "Ethiopian" ].
​
** "Phinehas, the son of Eleazor, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the the children of Israel ...." (Numbers 25:11); "And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood...." (Numbers 25:13).
​
So, again, we are provided proof that the so-called Biblical Jews were not the original authors of the Bible, particularly the Table Of Nations in the Book Of Genesis. For of the triplets sired by the fictitious Noah, we deduce from the verified meanings of Cush & Mizraim that Ham had to be Black. Why would anyone intentionally ensnare his or herself in a literary quandary from which there is no logical or rhetorical extrication? It is due time that Bible readers see it for what it really is. As for the Jadeists, we will not, of our own free will and clear conscience, conform to any system, nor commit to any faith or doctrine, that requires us to compromise our intellectual integrity for the sake of soliciting authoritative approval or some vain notion of Divine Salvation. No, we will not knowingly strive to exist in a false reality, nor fake sense just to make sense out of non-sense!
​
For those reading me for the first time, I redirect you to SQUARING THE LIGHT