Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

834

how can anybody think they were actual slaves in Egypt? so many of the verses completely contradict this fact. just like with the babylon slavery.. somehow they were slaves, yet occupied so many of the top positions in their govt. the assyrian story makes no sense either.. why would they take so many slaves, then deposit them to their north? you take slaves, divide them, put them on farms, then whip them into obedience, and kill any who wont behave.

of course the roman one, the only one we have a good amount of proof on, is the only one which makes sense.. they killed most of the males, took the land for themselves, took the women as slaves, and those slaves lost their identity. judaism only continued because so many jews were spread out living in other cities. it certainly wasn't the slaves who kept it going. this is also how every other true conquer and enslavement story pans out in history... except of course the ones in the bible, which have so many flaws in them.

it's pretty obvious that jewish revolution was the 'plague' in egypt. through banking they hoarded its wealth, then tried to destroy the country from within, or possibly they tried to take over and failed, then left with their 'plunder'. how the fuck else are 'slaves' supposed to plunder the most powerful nation on earth?

how can anybody think they were actual slaves in Egypt? so many of the verses completely contradict this fact. just like with the babylon slavery.. somehow they were slaves, yet occupied so many of the top positions in their govt. the assyrian story makes no sense either.. why would they take so many slaves, then deposit them to their north? you take slaves, divide them, put them on farms, then whip them into obedience, and kill any who wont behave. of course the roman one, the only one we have a good amount of proof on, is the only one which makes sense.. they killed most of the males, took the land for themselves, took the women as slaves, and those slaves lost their identity. judaism only continued because so many jews were spread out living in other cities. it certainly wasn't the slaves who kept it going. this is also how every other true conquer and enslavement story pans out in history... except of course the ones in the bible, which have so many flaws in them. it's pretty obvious that jewish revolution was the 'plague' in egypt. through banking they hoarded its wealth, then tried to destroy the country from within, or possibly they tried to take over and failed, then left with their 'plunder'. how the fuck else are 'slaves' supposed to plunder the most powerful nation on earth?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (10).
[–] • 1 pt (edited )

Jews are not Hewbrew/Israelites. You seem to be shaking off the propaganda. Yet still conflate the indoctrinated terminology.

The Jews are the Canaanites. The ashkenazi are Turkish Europeans. Both genetically confirmed.

https://poal.co/c/df149354-cbd3-4319-81d5-7efd9479f751#cmnts

There is also a question of timelines as it relates to Egypt. Egypt is dramatically older than in generally recognized. Likely older than 16,000 years. It is definitely pre-flood, which means it's older than roughly 11,600 years.

Many of the wild assumptions made about mapping biblical stories to people is based on the confirmed invalid assumptions that Egypt is less than 6000-7000 years old. The pyramids themselves document 300+ generations of Pharaohs. If you assume an average of 40 years, that's 12,000 years documented by the pyramids themselves. Of course, they stopped updating that thousands of years ago. Which further makes my point.

It's funny how people fight to protect Jewish revisionism even though overwhelming evidence exists it's a lie.