Marley’s Ascent To “Zion”

The AP reports,

The wife of reggae star Bob Marley said Wednesday that she plans to exhume his remains in Jamaica and rebury them in his “spiritual resting place,” Ethiopia.

The reburial is set for an unspecified date after monthlong celebrations of the 60th anniversary of Marley’s birth to be held next month in Ethiopia. Both the Ethiopian church and government officials have expressed support for the project, Rita Marley told The Associated Press.

Full story.

[Update] Reuters has a conflicting report.

16 thoughts on “Marley’s Ascent To “Zion”

  1. I am on the rock and then I check a stock
    I have to run like a fugitive to save the life I live
    I’m gonna be Iron like a Lion in Zion
    I’m gonna be Iron like a Lion in Zion
    Iron Lion Zion
    I’m on the run but I ain’t got no gun
    See they want to be the star
    So they fighting tribal war
    And they saying Iron like a Lion in Zion
    Iron like a Lion in Zion,
    Iron Lion Zion
    I’m on the rock, (running and you running)
    I take a stock, (running like a fugitive)
    I had to run like a fugitive just to save the life I live
    I’m gonna be Iron like a Lion in Zion
    I’m gonna be Iron like a Lion in Zion
    Iron Lion Zion, Iron Lion Zion, Iron Lion Zion
    Iron like a Lion in Zion, Iron like a lion in Zion
    Iron Like a Lion in Zion

  2. I have some neighbors who are Rastas. They are absolutely wacko ideologically, with all those brain cells going to pot.

  3. that’s beautiful, tho! If i happen to die in exile, i want my devotees to bring my body to be buried in Zion.

  4. Pre Guiliani clean up we used to have all kinds of preachers running around the city, my favorite were the black dudes who claimed they are the real Jews, and no white people could have been. Apparently there is some reference in the Bible to one of the Prophets having hair like wool. I Know some Jews with some damn good Dreadlocks.. ..

  5. you mean the black israelites — you can still catch ’em on 42nd st. or around union sq. depending on the day of the week.
    i remember one time they were demonstrating in front of, if i recall correctly, the biyalistoker shul on the LES. they were shouting, “you’re not the real jews, we’re the real jews!” and elderly man appeared from the shul and shouted back, “you’re not the real shvartzas! we’re the real shvartzas!”

  6. “you mean the black israelites — you can still catch ’em on 42nd st. or around union sq. depending on the day of the week.” I thought those were black Jews for Jesus? Aren’t the black israelites Ethiopian?

  7. Ah yes, the Black Israelites of Times Square are fun. I usually refer to them as simply “the Real Jews”. My friend who is a Chinese Jamaican Jew – and who can quote the bible from memory – challenged their assertions one time, and got them all riled up.

  8. I’m pretty sure Ethiopian Jews are indeed “the Real Jews” or, at least, they are the OGs (Original Gews). I’m also fairly certain that the folks on 42nd street are not Jews at all, but Messianic Christians, aka “Jews for Jesus.” But don’t quote me on any of that….

  9. the black israelites are the crazies in times square. the black hebrews are the jews in dimona. however, the black hebrews are christian messianists. i’ve never heard the black israelites claim jesus was the messiah. i have, however, heard them say that jesus was a black man.

  10. there is a gemara, i think in the yerushalmi sotah, definitely brought down in the Eiyn Yaakov, saying that the word “ethiopean” (Kushi) is a euphemism for “special” or “different,” claiming, that, just as a black man unique and distinguished in a room full of white folks, so too is everyone refered to as Kushi in the bible.
    Sound like a stretch, but remember that the same bibile uses canaanite often as a euphemism for any kind of vendor and stuff like that. Note how similar the definition of Kushi is really similar to the definition of Hebrew (other sider) both denoting radical difference, usually in hte context of praise.
    So really, we are the real shvartzes.

  11. The Black Israelites who used to preach in Times Square were indeed Christians. They were of a group called the Israeli Church of Universal Practical Knowledge (ICUPK), but have since changed their name to the Israelite Church of God and Jesus Christ (ICGJC). At present, their official web site is http://www.theholyconceptionun
    They sided only with the King James Bible, and therefore considered the New Testament and Apocrypha (i.e. Sefarim Ha-Chitsonim) to be scripture. Their chief doctrine is that African Americans and Hispanics make up the 12 Tribes of Israel, while all white people (whether they claim to be Jewish or not) descend from Esav. They also claim that Modern Israeli Hebrew is mere “Yiddish” (which begs the question, then, of what Yiddish is), and that they speak the true form of Hebrew, a spurious dialect they call “Lashawan Qadash”.
    Regarding “Lashawan Qadash,” this is essentially Hebrew without niqqudot or the vowels they represent, thus no cholam, no segol, no qubuts, no hireyq, rather all consonants make the sound of the patach. Also, they pronounce the tsade as “TAZA” and refuse to acknowledge that the tav can make a ‘t’ sound (they call it “THA”) or that the shin can make an ‘s’ sound (they call it “SHA”) or that the feh can make an ‘f’ sound (they call it “PA”). Most bizarre of all, they claim the ayin is pronounced like ‘I’ as in “pie” or “bike”. Hence “Lashawan Qadash,” which is “Lashon Qodesh” in their pronunciation. Humorously, none of them have actually ever learned this language (i.e. some have attempted to create booklettes that teach “Lashawan Qadash,” but grammatically it does not differ from Modern Israeli Hebrew, and seems to not extend beyond the pa’al verb stem, giving the impression they just started to copy some stuff out a “Teach Yourself Hebrew” book but never completed the task).
    Anyway, some of their doctrines have been refuted rather thoroughly in the following articles:
    Oh, and regarding the IsraeliteNation website Sword Cutter cited, I get the impression this is one of the break away groups from the ICUPK. In the 90s, and number of groups broke away from the ICUPK and started changing their doctrines. Some abandoned the tendentious claims about “Lashawan Qadash,” and others stopped preaching hate (i.e. they still maintained the primacy of the King James Bible and that African Americans are the true Israelites, but they started interpreting Isaiah 56:3-8, Matthew 28:19, and the 10th chapter of Acts as teaching that non-Israelites can convert and/or receive salvation). This group seems to be of that cohort.

  12. To add a bit more, I once saw them in Times Square get into one of their many shouting matches with people passing by, but on this particular day the debate was with regard to what language the man they claim was Mashiach (i.e. you know who) spoke. The person in the crowd claimed that J spoke Hebrew, just as Israelis do today, and the speaker, who adhered to the aforementioned conspiracy theory about Modern Israeli Hebrew being mere “Yiddish,” started screaming that J “didn’t speak not Yiddish!” At the time, I mused silently to myself about the preacher’s use of a double negative. If J “didn’t speak no Yiddish,” it seems the conclusion which logically follows from this is that he, therefore, did speak at least some Yiddish. This brings to mind the Yiddish-savy joke that when J opened the covenant up to the gentiles (according to xian theology), one requirement for conversion was that they abstain from sexual immorality; with homosexuality (i.e. “going Greek”) particularly in mind, J said unto them: “if you’re a shaygetz and you want to enter the kingdom of heaven, don’t put your schmeky in another man’s tuchas.” Anyway, if there was an historical J (i.e. if he really existed), he probably spoke Aramaic. The xian texts put a phrase in his mouth that is relevant to the coversation above, as it has him quoting a verse from Tehelim. What is interesting is that the text that bares the alleged quote tries to transliterate it, giving us insight into what Hebrew and or Armaic was like at the dawn of the common era. Such a passage (which they take to be historical) “true Hebrew” (i.e. Biblical Hebrew, as well as the Hebrew and Aramaic of the first century, which these types assume are identical) was not all that different in terms of pronunciation and conjugation of pa’al verb stem from Modern Israeli Hebrew. Of course, such an observation would be lost on these monolingual types. Nonetheless, I wrote an article on the subject, and would like to hear the thoughts of others on the issue:
    http://www.lubienski.com/yeshu sprache.html
    Now, it gives the impression that I wish to argue that Modern Israeli Hebrew is identical to Biblical Hebrew. That is not what I’m arguing (I understand there are differences, and some are humorous, like taqpee’eni in Job 10 meaning “you curdled me,” but to an Israeli who only knows Modern Israeli Hebrew, they’ll see something like “you will freeze me”). The point is basically to be a polemic against this group, as “true Hebrew” seems at least to be a heck of a lot closer to Modern Israeli Hebrew than it is the tendentious “Lashawan Qadash” dialect that exists only in their minds. Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

  13. During the course of Biblical history our fathers and mothers always had a representative who communicated with God directly. It was a natural thing, everyone did not go to God. It is written all over the Old Testament. These chosen men spoke to God in HEBREW; or rather God spoke to these men in the real and original HEBREW tongue; because they were a special people unto him.
    So what and where is the Hebrew language that we read about within the scriptures? The answer will take a bit of understanding and research from you the reader. This language was never a literary language that was spoken by every Israelite, neither was it written down or taught as a language to communicate between men. The Hebrew spoken about in the scriptures was a spiritual experience that often took place between the God of Israel and whom ever he was communicating with. It was a state of spiritual communication, a language that later became to be known as speaking in tongues.
    By the 3rd century B.C the spoken language of the children of Jacob (Who are the children of slavery today) was a Semitic language called Aramaic. The Holy tongue, as non-Israelites began to call it, it was still carefully being studied because of the difference from the original. During this same period, a collection of laws, later to become the Mishnah was being worked out in a new type of “Hebrew” this Mishnaic “Hebrew” was strongly influenced by the spoken Aramaic by the teachers of this doctrine. Its vocabulary was also enriched by a flood of words from Greek and Latin. A variety of new joining words such as “while”, “because”, although”, and “despite” replaced the ever-present Biblical “and”. Thus what was then called Hebrew became more flexible and literate.
    In those days when a man was in the spirit and communicating with God (in the midst of his brethren) an interpreter was needed in order to edify the others, (1st Corinthians 14: 27-28). This interpreter would also have to be in a spiritual state having the gift of interpretation. This language was never practiced nor rehearsed. It is a direct communicating link between the God of Israel and His servants.
    This practice is very similar to today’s time where certain words from different languages have been combined and are used interchangeable as a word having the same meaning in both languages.
    The same took place with this spiritual language having some words escape due to the frequency of its use among Israelite Prophets and teachers. A dialect was formed with the present everyday language and the new spiritual words that have been heard more then once, such was the Biblical Hebrew language found in the New Testament spoken in the days of Paul. (Acts 21:40, 22:2).
    Why doesn’t the Israelite Nation World Wide Ministries indulge in this practice of speaking this so-called language?
    1) What is left of, and from God’s spoken tongue is nothing Holy, it is all in all corrupt, misguided and false. This present Hebrew now includes mixed words from God’s Biblical enemies, and Gentiles: The descendants from Japheth Gog and Magog.
    2) Ezekiel 38:1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
    Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: Ezekiel 39:1-7 The book of Revelation also states the folly of this false inheritance. Rev. 20:
    This new “Hebrew” tongue again changed and was strongly influenced by the literature of the middle ages. From the 11th to the 14th century when Europeans were involved in the studying the doctrine of the Israelites: scholars in Spain and Provence translated many important philosophical works from Arabic and often put the new “Hebrew” words together in odd, unfamiliar ways. A touch of Yiddish was also added. They also invented a set of abstract philosophic terms (words such as “quality” and “essence”) which broadened the possibilities of thought and expression in the concocted so-called “Hebrew language”.
    For many years this formulated “Hebrew” tongue was used for religious purposes by the practitioners of Judaism (Khazars/Edom). Toward the end of the 18th century, this “Hebrew” tongue was made into a literary language. At the beginning of the 20th century, this made up language became a spoken tongue and it is now the official language of the state of Palestine (called Israel). This so called “Hebrew” resembles its originator’s European tongue (Gentiles) because those who speak it today were for the most part raised in European countries Children of Japheth (Gog and Magog)
    The directive given by Paul in 1st. Corinthians 14:1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. The entire chapter tells that Paul is putting more emphasis on edifying rather than speaking in tongues. We should also note here that Paul was writing to Gentiles who had no contact with the spiritual language but just zealous to be like Israelites.
    The question must be asked where did the Hebrew language come from and who first spoke it? We would have to venture to the first Hebrew our father Abraham who was called out from his father’s house, way of life and way of living. He was born and raised in Ur of the Chaldeas (Chaldean) which is a region of ancient Babylonia. His tongue would naturally be that of his kinfolk and family; a Chaldean language.
    Next we would visit Moses who was born and raised in Egypt as an Egyptian as a son of Pharaoh. It is apparent as to what language he would have spoken while being a product of his environment, “Egyptian”. If not Egyptian then the closest alternative would be the language of his father Abraham or a very close evolution of this dialect. After 430 years of the children of Israel being in Egypt what language would they have spoken? And if they spoke a Holy language called Hebrew where did they learn it?
    The true Israelites were enslaved by the English, French, Portuguese and Spanish, and just as our forefathers Moses and Abraham we have adopted and fluently speak the languages of our land. The I.N.W.W.M’s language is that of our current stay, the English tongue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.