A LIGHT SHINING IN THE DARKNESS
DUTY
UPDATED MAR. 14, 2026 1:34 P.M.
There’s an undeniable pathos of Anti-Kemetism that pervades the Judaic Old Testament Tradition, completely depriving Biblical Egypt of any amicable representation in its defense. But with the knowledge gained through persistent research, and the newfound self-identity it has provided me, I will stand in its defense. Yet it should not be my responsibility alone, but the duty of every proud Jadeist, to champion the cause of ancient Kemet, to revive its TRUE Biblical Heritage, to restore its place of honor in universal history, and reclaim the legacies rightfully belonging to it!
​
We try as much as possible to resist playing the race card. But we've reached a point where it just isn't feasible to avoid it. For when it comes to the Bible, it's beneath one's dignity to pretend that it is a revelation dictated by Almighty God himself. Surely, God would've known better than that. And when considering that up to a point, the Semitic-Hebrew account of world history (from the creation of man onward), in comparison with the African-Egyptian version, are mutually exclusive, one becomes immediately aware that a choice has to be made between the two. If a Black person ---- or for that matter any non-Semite --- were to accept the Old Testament as the one, true, divinely inspired Religion, it would entail the renunciation, whether consciously or not, of any other. This, I know, is especially difficult for any Black person thoroughly educated in ancient African History, since they would be acutely aware of the fact that African History, and therefore religion, is the older of the two.
​
When a Black person voluntarily worships the Hebrew God of the Old Testament, (s)he would have to do so with the knowledge that, on the universal scale of humanity, (s)he ranks no higher than a second-class product of creation. I certainly wouldn't prefer a God who has given privilege to a Chosen circle from which I will be forever excluded. In that scenario, how could there ever exist an idealistic notion of EQUALITY as a universal reality, if God himself caters to favorites above all others?
I had become a Research Specialist on the subject of Moses & the Exodus, so that I could one day share the results with you, which I've come to call King's Theophoric Theory. By it, I advance the proposition that the Biblical Moses is a fictional creation, however, one based upon the composite biographies of actual Egyptian kings & scribes who bore the same, or conceptionally-related, theophoric(s), e.g., Thoth, Yah, &/or Ra. Also, that along with these theophorics, historically-confirmed events transpired involving both natural and human agencies which were reinterpreted to fit the Biblical narrative.
​
Since the decipherment of the Rosetta Stone we've learned that 'Moses' isn't a proper name, and it certainly doesn't mean "drawn from the water," as the Biblical Narrative had led the majority to believe (Ex. 2:10). Rather, it really means "born of" or "given birth by". Since the protagonist of the Exodus story is told (by the god on Mt. Sinai) that his (God's) name is Jehovah (or at least how it is currently translated in Bibles), we may be justified in speculating that this Moses would've adopted the theophoric of YAH-Moses. This conclusion can be supported by actual Egyptian, textual evidence. For example, the 1st king of Egypt's 18th Dynasty worshipped Yah. He was also personally involved an an exodus --- but from the Egyptian perspective of it.
​
Be forewarned that this theory is notoriously controversial because, in proving that the Biblical Moses is a fiction, it also disproves a supernatural encounter by him with God and the subsequent revelation of The Law. Nevertheless, my theory can be corroborated by material evidence. This is why the task of disseminating this theory has fallen to me alone. Mainstream publishers, for whatever their particular religious reasons, are skeptical about broaching such a sensitive subject. It's also problematic because, since it poses relevance in bridging & restoring a Black racial identity to the Biblical Religion, it also challenges the nature of the god upon which the Biblical Religion is based. E.g., as already stated, the Biblical God favors a people specifically chosen by himself. Can that still be considered true? Can it, or will it, remain that way? The bottom line is a new idea of the Biblical God must be conceived. Ultimately, my theory will prove that the alleged Hebrew version of the Bible wasn't the original one. I favor neither of the 3 faiths (Judaism, Christianity, or Islam) and, because of this impartiality, am confident that I have produced research results that are as objective as humanly possible.
​
For the past 20 years I've been reading about how the 'modern' or 'current' scholarly consensus is doubtful about the historicity of the Biblical Narrative, particularly Moses, the Exodus, and the subsequent conquest of Canaan. These events cannot be located on any conventional, historical timeline. My theory proves that the reason for such absence is because those narratives are the product of "alternate" history. So, again, one of my reasons for writing this is to rectify this "alternate" history by returning it to its rightful point of origin.
​
In the end, I hope you ponder the same questions as me. Foremost: Is my analysis & internal criticism of the OT Narratives any different than that of Humphrey Hody's, in regards to his judgment rendered on the Letter of Aristaeus (its inconsistencies & anachronisms). Yet modern scholarship stands unanimously with Hody (according to Wikipedia)! This unrelenting bias of the so-called Bible scholars, their irrational reluctance to apply the same method of analysis to the OT, leads to the suspicion that they simply cannot bear with the reality it will inevitably expose. For example, once any part of the Biblical Moses profile is equated with Ahmose I, it MUST be concluded that he is as much an Ethiopian as his sister-wife! It is my duty to make the Black readers aware of this reality.