Introduction To The Context We Must Deconstruct, Then Reconstruct
The first king of Edom was not from the tribe of Esau Edom or from the tribe of his twin brother Jacob Israel. (Genesis 36:31)We must go back to an earlier space and time. Genesis 10 says the first kingdom, thus king, was Nimrod, the first powerful ruler on Earth.
Once we accept the false notion of the first powerful ruler coming from Asia, then we are more likely to think the first use of the word Edom was for Esau.
Land Of Edom
Like all locations, the boundaries and names have changed. Also the land has come under different larger names when empire-type kingdoms are established. Before the land of Edom was called Edom, it was called Aduma, Adumah or Idumaea. These words are forms of Adam, and Edom is also a form of Adam.Kings Of Edom
1st King - Bela the son of BeorPossibility #1 - (Bela, Belah) of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 7, 8) Possibility #2 - Bela of Azaz of Shema/Shemaiah of Joel of Reuben. Bela dwelt in Aroer, even unto Nebo and Baalmeon: (1 Chronicles 5, Numbers 32, Ezra 10) Possibility #3 – Beor should be Peor. Peor is a mountain in Canaan near Moab. Peor is a form of Pethor). Both Peor and Pethor are used to describe Mesopotamia or an area within Mesopotamia. (Deuteronomy 23:4), (Numbers 23:28), (Smith: Dictionary 622)
Thus King Balak of Moab near Peor, could be differently spelled (Balak as Bela or Belah) and (Peor as Beor) Possibility #4 – Unnamed King of Bela. Bela is Zoar, which is near Sodom. This king fought Abraham. (1 Chronicles 11:12 and 8:1-4), (Genesis 19) Possibility #5 - Lineage as father and son. Bela could be the father who reigned during Abraham and Lot, then his son, Balaam ruled during the time of Moses. Possibility #6 – Lineage as father and son: Bela of Peor, then Balaam of Bela Possibility #7 - Lineage as brothers: Bela of (Peor, Pethor), then Balaam of (Peor, Pethor) Possibility #8 - Bela and Balaam could be the same person. Possibility #9 – The unnamed King of Bela (Zoar) could be a Pharaoh who ruled in an area named Bela that was located between Red Sea and Jordan River. Bela came out of the Nile 's Mestrean Valley before coming out of the Tigris-Euphrates Mesopotamian Valley. Thus Bela of Beor and Balaam of Beor could be forms of Belus or at least his sons, as power administered from Mesopotamia, not Egypt. Possibility #10 – Beor could represent (Berothai, Berothah), a city near Hamath at the north end of the Euphrates as the river makes its way through the mountains before reaching the open valley of Mesopotamia.[Hamath might be Khemet or there may be two locations] (2 Samuel 8:8; 2 Chronicles 1:39; Ezekiel 47:16) Possibility #11 – (Berossus, Berosus) was a Babylonian and priest of Belus. Thus, Berosus was a scribe, recorder, historian who may have inserted a form of his name into the history. Bero becomes Beor. A later writer could have made this change. (Cory: Ancient 23) Possibility #12 – It could be true that the sons of Berosus became king under a non-Greek form such as Beros. Priests becoming king may have been normal in real life true human history, but when the religion of IU was rewritten for Abram Abraham's purposes in the form of the JC bible, then priests are said to be from a specific tribe (Levi) of Jacob Israel. Possibility #13 – The difference between Beor and Peor could be a misprint. Possibility #14 – Beor and Peor could both be correct as forms of each other since “B” and “P” often interchange as mirror image metaphor symbols of sign language. Possibility #15 – In Mesopotamia, Belus and Omoroka were the Parent God. Their combination and abbreviation forms Beor. Beor is the father out front. This is given credence since Belus is the Greek form of Bel. Bel is the elder child (Bar, Sut, Baal). The primary credence is that all bibles are stories about the superhuman as told using the human metaphor. (AE2 585) 1st King Section Summary:
We go back to the name Peor. In keeping with what we know about the ever-changing rebirthplace of God, likely a covenant was established at Mount Peor. Baalpeor is simply the name of God of Mount Peor located in the area called Moab in the JC Bible, but called other names much earlier.
Then the birthplace changed and a new covenant established on (Mount Sinai, Horeb, Hor, Shennu, Seir) with a different branch of the human tribe. Earlier still, multiple covenants established on mountains in Africa. And/or in temples representing mountains. This cycle of changing birthplaces has traveled around the world repeating itself numerous times. Is it possible for this cycle to stop, and stay put in the current geographic locations of power and with the same branch of humans?
Does “there's a first time for everything,” apply, such that it actually is possible for power to remain in the same places in the same hands? Pay attention to everything in human life and life anywhere in any form. Haven't you heard how power is changing hands in the NBA, football, baseball and in sports in general?
Everything is a sign of the times, the two times, the two Ages that rule the world we live in. This same story of ever-changing people, places, things and actions, is the foundation of the story of the Kings of Edom.
Belus is said to be a form of Cush, Kepheus and Nimrod. We briefly remember Nimrod's reputation as a warrior and powerful ruler, and Kepheus as the Ethiopian King and Nile Valley Kush as basically the first tenured teacher not certified by humans. This coincides with what is expected of both Kepheus and Aquaria. (Garnier: Worship 444), (Houston: Wonderful) Beor, Peor, Pethor, Aorer, Zoar are similar in spelling and connected to different forms of Bela, thus these location names must also have a very closely interconnected significance. Bottom line for this section is the first King of Edom was not of the lineage of Esau renamed Edom or Jacob renamed Israel. Thus the JC Bible does present a lot of truth about human history; however, when the overall worldview context used to comprehend the truth, is suboptimal, then the truth, though right in plain sight, will become altered at the first level of consciousness and the first level of subconsciousness. Abraham is a descendant of Ham. A-bra-ham is Bar-Ham, son of Ham. The Barabras were also Ethiopians. Abraham could also be an Anakim as Arba-Ham. This is also a good spot to be reminded of the superhuman connection to Afra and Abra as the ever-coming one in Amenta Each truth gives birth to the other. Health give birth to sickness gives birth to health. Suboptimal is transformed into optimal. Lie into truth. And so on for anything that exists. As we move daily into the New Ages, a more detailed accurate account of human history will reveal how Abraham in black face, became Abraham in semite face and Abraham in white face. These terms are accurate since a black face revealed, has a white face hidden underneath. Likewise a white face revealed has a black face hidden underneath. This applies to all colors of faces that are revealed. There is another or other faces hidden beneath. (Joshua 14, 15)
And so it is with the face of truth. It is two-faced. Problem exists when a face is misplaced in our understandings across time and space and each set of conditions. On a related note, this brings to mind how misplaced our understandings are about the dark face, the dark side of the Moon that changes but remains the same. 2nd King - Jobab of Zerach/Zerah of Bozrah
Zerah of Reuel of (Esau & Bashemath) (Genesis 36), (1 Chronicles 1 – 2). Reuel does not appear to be the firstborn of Esau and Zerah does not appear to be the firstborn of Esau's grandsons. So how would they be in line for the kingship? This indicates doubt that this Zerah is the father of Jobab, King of Edom. Zerah of (Judah & Tamar) (Genesis 38). The Zarhites. Zerah has scarlet red associated with him as first to begin to emerge at birth, but his brother Pharez was born first. Likewise Esau is associated with being red and hairy and born first, then Jacob was born second and grabbed Esau's heel. Esau also begged Jacob for some red soup.
(Isaiah 63:1) “Who is this that cometh from Edom, with garments stained crimson from Bozrah?”
(AE1 530) Horus is Har-Tema the mighty avenger in his second character who comes at the end of cycles. Horus, personified as human, was the mother’s suffering son, the victim, who dies and rises again to make justice visible through judgment. Zerah of Simeon (Numbers 26). The Zarhites. Zerah of Iddo of Joah of Zimmah of Jahath of Libni of Gershom of Levi (1 Chronicles 6) Zerah of Adaiah of Ethan of Zimmah of Shimei of Jahath of Gershom of Levi (1 Chronicles 6) Zerah the Ethiopian was defeated by King Asa of Judah (2 Chronicles 14:9) Jobab of Joktan of Eber of (Salah, Shelah) of Arphaxad of Shem of Noah (Genesis 10), (1 Chronicles 1) Jobab, King of Madon (Joshua 11) Jobab of (Shaharaim & Hodesh)...of tribe of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 8) Jobab of Elpaal of (Shaharaim & Hushim)...of tribe of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 8) 2nd King Section Summary:
The second King Of Edom matches what appears to be from the lineage of Esau and also coincides with Jobab of Judah and (Joab, Joabb) of Zeruiah (David's Ammonite sister). For a king from the lineage of Esau to be in second position as King of Edom seems strange for kingship to pass from a non-Esau lineage and then to Esau's lineage. It is beyond likely that the word Edom as a person is not first associated with Esau of Isaac. As seems to be case in numerous instances, names in the lineage of Esau Edom could be borrowed from an earlier much larger non-Esau lineage, also called Edom. This we've shown through the earlier other place names of Edom. Furthermore this list of Kings of Edom in Genesis 36 appears to be chronological and the dukes of Esau are not listed until after the last King.
Finally, the 2nd King of Edom is likely to be Jobab of Madon, Benjamin or (Zerah, Zeruiah), but none of these being descendants of Isaac, Esau or Jacob, instead being of the the larger tribes of Canaanites, Aramites, Ethiopians. Bozrah is likely Basrah, a city near the Persian Gulf. Also Basra, Bas-rah, Bassorah, Bussorah. (Wikipedia), (Morse: American 445), (Taylor: Names 78)
Or it could be Bosrah, Bosra, Bozra. The location is also said to be in the land of Edom and/or Moab. The possibility of there being two locations is real, but some say this is too hastily put forth. 3rd King – Husham of the land of Temani
Tema of Ishmael (Genesis 25) Teman of Eliphaz of (Esau & Adah) (Genesis 36) Eliphaz the Temanite. Not likely Eliphaz of Esau since this Eliphaz was alive with Job. (Job 2, 4) Hushim likely same as Husham. After Husham died, Hadad ruled at Avith. Hushim gave birth to Abitub. Avitub/Abitub of (Shaharaim fathered children on the plains of Moab with his wife Hushim ) of tribe of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 8) Hushim of Dan (Genesis 46) 3rd King Section Summary:
What we've learned earlier continues to apply. Briefly stated, the lineage of Abraham took and attached themselves to lineages, people, places and events. Then for those lineages they wanted to denigrate, they made those people and places do unfavorable things or be slaves, servants or concubines and any other number of reasons justified for those people to be considered lesser. Sometimes their descendants are killed off or said to have no children. At the same time, their names were stolen, slightly changed and put under the descendants of Abraham in a favorable way also. This begins at the superhuman level and describes how processes work when, for instance, moving between darkness and light or age to age or between any two truths. The 3rd King of Edom is likely to be an Ishmaelite of Hagar (representing Hathor) and not of the lineage of Benjamin representing (Ben-Ammi, the Ammonites, not of Lot of Haran, even if for the simple reason the story of Lot's children is as non-credible as a human turning into a pillar of salt). Under any scenario, once again there is little reason to expect the third King of Edom to be of Esau's lineage. First Ishmael must rule since he was promised twelve tribes, twelve nations. Even after all the Kings of Edom are listed, Teman of Esau is still a duke. (Genesis 17, 25), (UC#1571).
Neither Tema, Teman, Esau or Ishmael of the descendants of Abraham could ascend to rule Edom unless they fought, killed and murdered for it. Therefore, this third king must be from the earlier Edomites, who like all groups of people, are a mixture of many tribes. 4th King – Hadad, son of Bedad
Hadad smote Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Avith.
Hadad took the Kingship of Midian by force, then later became King of Edom. This does not read as though he took Edom by force.
Hadad of Ishmael of (Abraham & Hagar) There is a connection to Hadadezer and (Ben-Hadad, Benhadad) but we will not take this investigation in that direction yet, since these Hadads do not fit the description.. 4th King Section Summary:
If any of these Kings of Edom were truly intended to be understood as descendants of Esau, their names, city locations and parentage would have been clearly stated. As it stands, without the name Edom being copied, cut, pasted and attached to Esau, there would be very little to support the King's of Edom being from the tribe of Esau.
A quick search of the phrase “father of” in the JC bible reveals how many names were simply stolen by stating this or that person was the “father of” this town, this place, this other person, this group. In the absence of these “father of” statements, there is little to no evidence. How easy is it to make these assertions and insert them when rewriting and creating a bible for yourself to help you rule the world using a mixture of real and pretend history?
And this is why, after the JC bible took root, it produced numerous offshoots that did precisely the same thing, each one has a different founder as “father of” such and such religious ideology. Lastly, to practice balance, we look at the phrase “mother of.” 5th King – Samlah of Masrekah
No information and no reason to think this is of Esau's lineage. Perhaps a form of Samuel and/or Salma, but not of Abraham's descendants. Perhaps from Mareshah. 6th King – (Saul, Shaul) of Rehoboth by the River
Rehoboth by the river is the same as Rehoboth or Rehob near the entrance to Hamat. This is east of Jordan on the Euphrates River [Hamath might be Khemet or there may be two locations] (2 Samuel 8:3), (Numbers 13), (1 Chronicles 1:49) Saul of (Rehob, King of Zobah by the Euphrates River). This kingship may have been by force because his brother, Hadadezer, had Edomite servants who protected his son, Hadad. (2 Samuel 8) 6th King Section Summary:
King Saul of Edom is perhaps who was defeated by King Saul of Israel & Judah OR these two kings could be the same person, who came from the east in Babylon, then the south in Edom, then north to rule in Israel & Judah. (1 Samuel 14) In many instances trying to straighten out superhuman confusion and historical lies, is an inexact science that must be continuously reviewed and updated as more understanding are pieced together in better order, because most of these names and lineages don't lend themselves to chronological order or to probable human history. When King Saul of Israel & Judah began fighting with David, this might have been when Hadadezer of Zobah, regained control of Edom. Then when David finally gained full power, he defeated Hadadezer and killed all the males of Edom. Hadadezer's young son named Hadad, was taken into Egypt and hidden until he grew up. This is the same story that keeps happening. Hadad left Egypt and became King of Syria. His lineage is likely the one that gave rise to Benhadad of Syria. Then later on another Benhadad of Syria came from Hazael. (2 Samuel 8) 7th King – Baalhanan of Achbor
Nehusta of Elnathan of Achbor of Michaiah/Mikhayah of Gemariah of Shaphan ….of Levi. Tribe of Levi is inferred based on the roles associated with the name. (2 Kings 22:12; 24:8), (Jeremiah 26:22; 36:11) From the lineage above we can see Baalhanan would be brother to Elnathan and uncle to Nehusta. We've already discussed the significance and symbolism of Nehusta. We associate negative and pagan with Baal. It makes no sense for the descendants of Levi of Jacob Israel to be King of Edom. Furthermore, the chapter that lists these kings states these kings existed before there any kings in Israel.
Note for later use: Elnathan is El-nathan which is a form of Io-nathan, thus Jo-nathan, thus Jonathan and Nathan and Natan and Nathaniel. Beginning with Jonathan we find multiple connections to King Saul, King David and to other signifcant persons, places and events. 8th King – (Hadad, Hadar)
Hadar ruled from Pau; and his wife's name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab. Hadar of Ishmael (Genesis 25) (Hadadezer, Hadarezer) King of Zobah. They are the same person. (2 Samuel 8, 10), (1 Chronicles 18.19) The lineages of the Kings of Edom abruptly end without explanation of what happens to (Hadad, Hadar). The next verse begins listing dukes of Esau Edom. This is a clear example of a scriptural rewrite hack job. It is not an example of holy words of god written by holy men of God. Instead, those who put the JC bible together are common theives, common criminals, deceivers who need believers.
Update
Before all the Kings above, there was Shinab, King of Admah. Admah is Adumah is Edom (Genesis 14). There were likely more Kings, Queens, Pharaohs and Kandakes who ruled Edom under different names. Update to Kings 6 - 8King David fought Hadadezer. This king is unlikely to be the 4th King of Edom, Hadad of Bedad, but rather more likely to be the 8th King of Edom, Hadad aka Hadar. Sometime between the time the Israelites took land in Judges 1 and until the time when King David fought Hadadezer in 2 Samuel 8, the Israelites must have lost control of some land.
Then King Saul took some back. Based on who King David fought, then King Saul must have at least fought Baalhanan However it is possible, as suggested above, that King Saul of Israel fought King Saul of Edom. (1 Samuel 14). Then King Saul reigned forty years, During that time and his struggle with David, King Saul likely lost control of some land. This would allow Baalhanan to rise. (Acts 13:21), (1 Samuel 14, 15). Under these scenarios, Agag, King of the Amalekites must have been in power at the same time as Saul of Edom.
Agag is the grandfather of Haman, a Persian. Amalek gave birth to Agag, the Amalekite Persian Israelite Jew.
Haman of Hamdata of Agagi....of Amalek of (Eliphaz & Timna, concubine) (1 Samuel 15:8)
This cannot be the same Amalek of Esau because there were Amalekites in the land before Abraham and Lot arrived. (Genesis 14). This is why it is certain that the lineage of Abraham and Lot borrowed the names of all those in power and placed those names under themselves. This was done to an even greater extent by Levi and Judah, who took it even further by saying priests and prophets can only come from Levi (mainly through Aaron) and kings from Judah (only through David and Solomon). References:
Cory, Isaac Preston, "Ancient Fragments Of The Phoenician, Chaldean, Egyptian, Tyrian, Carthaginian, Indian, Persian, And Other Writers; With An Introductory Dissertation: And An Inquiry Into The Philosophy And Trinity Of The Ancients," William Pickering (London:1832), Second Edition Houston, Drusilla Dunjee, "Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire," Book 1, 1926, 2017 PDF by globalgreybooks.com Garnier, John Colonel "The Worship of the Dead Or The Origin And Nature Of Pagan Idolatry And Its Bearing Upon The Early History Of Egypt And Babylonia" (London: 1904), Chapman and Hall Limited Morse, Jedidiah, The American Universal Geography; or A View Of The Present State Of All The Kingdoms, State And Colonies In The Known World , Vol II, The Eastern Continent Embracing Europe, Asia, Africa with their adjacent islands, Seventh Edition, (Boston: 1819) Smith, William, Editor, "A Dictionary Of Greek & Roman Geography," John Murray (London:1873), Volume II, download pdf. Taylor, Isaac, "Names and Their Histories: A Handbook of Historical Geography and Topographical Nomenclature," Rivingtons, (London:1898), Second Edition Revised, p. , download pdf.
