This is Mtama, Adi.

9:25 – 27 leads us to the passage in the Bible and the

words that we have seen about Conon, Chem, and Job. It may be noticed that
nothing
is mentioned about Ingnaka Gom.
There is no fish of Gom, Fish of Cush, Fish of Mizroim or Fish of Booth. Instead,
one of his four sons was named Kanakana
Since everyone has been annihilated, does this not prove that being
annihilated is
not a curse?
Adi. In 10:6, regarding the Gentiles, “the sons of Gentiles, Cush,
Mizraim,
(Gen. 10:6 and Gen. 9:25). Let's say that Conan's followers are removed
They are Booth and Kanan,” said Om.
The phrase "unseemly conduct disrespectful to his father..." is satisfactory.
Why
do we want to accept this? We know nothing about what is involved in such
easy-tounderstand
concepts.
As we know, how many of them had settled in the promised land of Conan! Not
in
North Africa . They were fierce idolaters; They had built Nadavan for Ebinaraya
to
destroy their land and take over the land for themselves. Conon's descendants
were
either killed or descended from Nazam.
Not at all.
Beaten under the Ebinarite or Israelite.
After drinking na novo fermented / na othitha tirotkarasadatta, he had
It refers to 'Egypt under the ascendant' .
Experiences are continuous events, Adi. In 9:19 – 24, Mack is mentioned. Gom
is a
universal god. Although we can explain this in many ways, I do not know. As
noted in
Russell's R3044 ,
However, concerning the descendants of Conon and their territories in Gen.
10:15 – 19 are described in the following verse. In these cases
Nor do we have any reason to say that any people who settled in Konon are
negroes.
If there were to be any people who were ultimately exiled from Morocco, a new
site of
Gom, it would have to be Mizroim, Cush and Gom, the peoples of Africa. (There
cannot be others without them.)
Egypt was known in hindsight as “Kamin Khatem” . Eng. 105:23, 27;
(logically) porthole, in the other three Kumorarutadaya descendants
1