Flesh Will Inherit The Kingdom of Heaven Actually

I know many of you are thinking I just explicitly disagreed with 1 Corinthians 15:50.

"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption."

But that's a verse that is commonly misunderstood because of people proof texting it out of context.  Starting with how they even drop the last part of that verse about Corruption and Incorruption.

The next verse talks about how we will be Changed at the General Resurrection, and the verse after that saying we'll be raised Incorruptible and Changed.

Verse 53-54 say.

"For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.  So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory."

So placing verse 50 in the context of all that, what is clearly meant is that bodies of MERE Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the Kingdom.  The difference between our future Resurrected Bodies and how our Bodies are now is entirely a matter of what will be added we currently lack not anything being taken away

This is also why II Corinthians 5:2-3 refers to us as currently Naked because we lack our true Spiritual bodies.  We are not Spirits trapped in Bodies but Bodies that lack Spirit.

People will also use selective quotations of verses 35-38 and 42-46 to say "the Body raised isn't the same Body that was buried", ignoring how Paul is saying all of this in the context of an allegory of planting a Seed or Grain in the Earth and then a much larger Plant growing out of it.  It is being called a different body because of how it's nature has changed, not because there is no material biological continuity.

Also Paul's use of "Celestial" in this Chapter means "Heavenly" as in the Sky and Outer Space, no one in Paul's times used the word "Heaven" to mean some non Material world of Forms, Pre-Christian Platonists called that a place beyond Heaven.  Same with Spirit, it did not mean "non Material" too any first Century Greek speakers.

Again a good visual metaphor for what I think our change at the Resurrection will be like is a Transformation sequence from a Magical Girl Anime.

Biblically Orange isn’t a real Color

The word “Orange” does not occur anywhere in the King James Bible or to my knowledge any other English Translations either.  The modern Hebrew word for the Color Orange is Katom but like a lot of modern Hebrew words it is a recent addition to the language.

Hebrew isn’t the only Language however where acknowledging Orange as a distinct color is a recent development.  Even English didn’t come up with the word Orange till like 500 years ago, the Color was named after the fruit not the other way around.  And the Japanese Language didn’t have any word for Orange till it’s modern Westernization started.

How we classify and think about Colors is to a large extent culturally constructed, that doesn’t mean different cultures are literally not seeing the same things we see.  But it does mean how we think about and classify them isn’t always the same.

Now a lot of people make a lot of mistakes when choosing Blue to be the color they focus on for talking about this, Blue is actually one of the oldest Colors to get a word it in most languages, and I’ve seen at least one person spreading this “Ancients didn’t see the color Blue” myth say Blue isn’t in The Bible even though anyone as Biblically literate at me knows that the Veil of the Temple basically has the color scheme of the Bisexual Flag.  The Hebrew word for Blue is Tekhelet, Red is Edom, Purple is Argaman, Greek is Yereq and Yellow is Tsahab.  

I really started thinking about the subjectiveness of the very existence of Orange as a distinct color when I was watching MandJTV’s video about Pokémon Colors.  Pokémon Home’s official Color designations for Pokémon can be subjectively disagreed with for many reasons.  But a big part of it is them not having the color Orange at all, every Pokémon you are likely thinking of as an Orange Pokémon is classified as either Red or Brown.

The thing about calling Nintendo Officially wrong on this however is that the list of “Orange” Pokémon officially classified as Red includes Charmander and Charizard, Charizard is Iconically the Box Art Mascot of Pokémon Red and FireRed in both Japan and the West and that is why they are often paired with the Human Character officially named Red.

As I thought about this I began to notice other ways in which Orange as a distinct color seems to be ignored in Japanese Media.  There has never been an Orange Power Ranger to my knowledge because there has never been an Orange Sentai, at least not one called Orange.  Now Purple Rangers are also rare but that’s because Japan associates Purple with Shadows and Darkness and so that color is often reserved for Villains or at least Antiheros.  There is an Anime literally called Orange, but I haven’t watched it yet so I have no idea what to expect, it could be named after the Fruit rather then Color given how there is an Anime called Citrus.

When I was first taught about Colors in School as a kid I was taught that Red, Blue and Yellow are the primary colors while Green, Purple and Orange are the secondary colors each made from combining two of the primary colors.  That’s based on how paints are made, in terms of how Light and our Eyes work it's actually a misleading system.

In our eyes the three Primary Colors are actually Green, Red and Blue with everything deriving from how they interact.  Yellow is in fact the product of combining Red and Green while Orange is an imperfect Yellow that is more Red.

Besides the Fruit which the Color is now synonymous with, everything else you can think of as being Orange is more anciently culturally associated with either Red, Brown or Yellow.  Fire, the Sun, sand and deserts, ect.  Meanwhile Brown is really just Dark Orange and has itself been anciently associated with Red (Biblically many think the Red associated with Esau and David was probably Brown).  Also think about how often people called Gingers (Red Haired) really have Orange hair.

I spent much of my life thinking I was mildly Color Blind where the Color Orange is concerned for struggling to distinguish that color from Yellow or Red. I didn’t even notice that Charmander and Charizard were technically not Red till I watched this video a few days ago.  But now I know that both God and Anime see that color the same way I do.

Napoleon Restored the Revolution of 1789

The notion that Napoleon’s 18 Brumaire Coup represented the complete undoing of everything the French Revolution fought for is the greatest misnomer in all Historical Discourse.

The radical even by modern standards political visions of the Girondins, Colliders, Jacobins and Enrages had already been dead for years but were themselves the product of the Revolution moving beyond its original goal.  After half a decade of rule by the Centrists devoid of any real political vision Napoleon was supported by multiple key leaders of the original Revolution.  

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes was the original ideological leader of the Revolution, his “What is the Third Estate” was the Declaration of Independence of the Bourgeoisie.  He had faded into the background when the Revolution was radicalized and then became a vital backer of Napoleon’s Coup.

Of course he and a lot of the well known spokesmen of Bourgeoisie ideology were not strictly speaking of the Bourgeoisie themselves.  Someone who was would be Claude Perier who played an overlooked material role in starting the Revolution in 1789, was not fond of the Radicalism of 1792-94 and then was another vital backer of Napoleon and was among the founders of the Bank of France.

Even when Napoleon later became Emperor he was embodying the Pre-Revolution concept of the Enlightened Monarch.

This is the problem I have with Peter Coffin’s “Leftism is the Left Wing of Capitalism” nonsense.  The French Revolution started and ended as a Bourgeoisie Revolution because of its Right Wing.

The Enrages were Proto Marxist-Leninists the Conspiracy of the Equals were proto Libertarian Socialists.  The Girdondins may not have been Socialist enough to fit an official definition but they would have been enough for the CIA to overthrow them in a Coup during the Cold War.

Am I a Marxist?

Marxism is strictly speaking not a Socio-Economic or Political Ideology but a way of looking at History.  That can have implications on how one looks towards achieving their political goals, but you can in theory agree with a Marxist analysis of history while having politics that are the opposite of Marx’s.

At its broadest most basic sense Marxism is viewing history as primarily driven by Class Conflict and Material Conditions.  And in that I am essentially Marxist.  And my political goals are also the same, I am a Communist who desires a Moneyless, Classless Stateless Society.

However I view a lot of the specifics of how Marx and Engels framed their History of Class Conflict as gravely mistaken, which many contemporary Marxists and especially MLs still cling to dogmatically.  The division of eras simplistically into Primitive-Communism then “Slavery” then “Feudalism” then Capitalism being where we are now is very problematic in how biased towards a Western Perspective it is.  But even within that Western Perspective is still an oversimplification and tied to now outdated terminology.  The Socio-Economic Mode of Production of the Middle Ages is better defined as Manorialism not “Feudalism” for one example.

I have prior posts on this Blog already talking about aspects of all that.  But for further understanding of how wrong both the Marxist and common Liberal understanding of “Feudalism” and the Middle Ages is I recommend reading the book Those Terrible Middle Ages Debunking The Myths by Regine Pernoud and/or watching the YouTube videos on this Playlist I made.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4CWxmx4wepgNS9Ql6ZQfxjbA5XkJ4OSP

Marxism is an Apostate child of Hegelianism.  Hegelianism was all about viewing History as driven by Conflicts, New Atheists are very Hegleian in their devotion to the discredited Science vs Religion Conflict thesis.  But I say Apostate because while keeping a form Conflict in his view of History Marx also rejected the Idealism that Hegel inherited from Kant and Plato preferring to see things Materialistically like an Empiricist or Epicurean or Aristotelian or Stoic.  But Marx and Engels were not the first Materialist Worker focused Socialists, before them came Flora Tristan and Moses Hess.

TIK ignores the ways in which Marx Apostatized from Hegelianism in building his little Ideological Genealogy.  He recognized Aristotelianism as ultimately independent of Platonism in-spite of how Aristotle started as a student of Plato, well Marx is to Hegel as Aristotle was to Plato.

However the Marxists have brought this on themselves by not rejecting all the Hegelian terminology they should have.  “Dialectical Materialism” is an Oxymoron, Dialectics is definitionally an idealist concept having its roots in Pythagorean Dualism.  It no longer means what it originally meant in how Marx and Engels use the word, but modern Marxists fall right back into Hegelian Idealism for example in how Slavoj Zizek refuses to see a third option existing for anything including Gender.

Being a Communist and being a Zionist on the Internet are very similar.

I can explain how I'm a Communist because I believe in Collective Ownership of the means of production while working towards the goal of a Moneyless, Classless, Stateless Society.  Or that I’m a Zionist because I support the Israelis right to self determination in their Ancient Homeland.  And for every response that does attempt to engage with what I said I support there are far more than just go “look at the obviously evil things done by this Nation-State” which has nothing to do with those principals.

So let me make myself clear, I am no apologist for the actions of Israel especially not recently, or of Modern China or North Korea or the Soviet Union for most of its history.  Now Cuba, Vietnam and Laos I do think are reasonably successful Communist experiments, but they aren’t hills I’m willing to die on either.

Also as an American Citizen I firmly oppose the U.S. getting involved in any Middle East conflict on either side, in any way, either Military or Financially.

Even if a given Nation-State’s ruling ideology has no significant differences on paper from the specific form of Communism or Zionism I espouse, that would still not make every action that State took a reflection of the ideology.

However, that's not the case.  I’m a Labour-Zionist, and yes a lot of Israeli Prime Ministers were too, but their Labour party was diluted not unlike the British Labor Party.  Israel isn’t the only Capitalist State to ever have nominal Socialist Prime Ministers, even Japan had one briefly in the mid 90s.  But now Israel has for nearly 30 years been dominated by Likud, the Israeli equivalent of the LDP, an Authoritarian Socially Conservative and Economically Capitalist Party.

And with Communism every Communist State has been not just specifically Marxist but more specifically Leninist.  Lenin was actually already controversial within Marxism, both in Russia and outside of it, before even the 1905 Russian Revolution happened.  So no Bolshevism didn’t become what makes it distinct from other Marxisms as a result of being a ruling party.  Rosa Luxemburg predicted why Lenin’s Vanguardism would prove inherently corrupt and what happened vindicated her completely.  

One of her main points was the innate spontaneity of a true Popular Revolution, something Lenin refused to accept after the February Revolution spreading conspiracy theories that it was an Allied plot (his Revolutionary Defeatism” was always just an excuse for siding with the Central Powers, he was no true Pacifist).

Another of her main points was about Bureaucracy, which Lenin mocked people for being concerned about.  This is why Trotskyism, as sympathetic to Trotskyists as I sometimes am also fails, you can’t pretend you are rejecting only Stalin not Lenin when Lenin mocked you in advance.

I don’t claim to have all the answers to figure out how to do either Communism or Zionism correctly.  But I do know good Zionism needs to also respect the right to self determination of the other people living west of the Jordan.  And any desire to expand Israel’s border East of the Jordan is unacceptable.

Soul Sleep and Christian Mortalism are not the same

 And yet they’re stuck sharing the same Wikipedia Page.

Soul Sleep and believing the Soul is just as dead as the body between physical death and physical resurrection have a lot in common, both reject the Platonist/Pythagorean/Essene/Origenist view of The Soul that has become the mainstream popular view. One definitely does and the other still could involve a lack of any concise state between death and resurrection.  

But Soul Sleep allows more wiggle room, it could allow Souls in Sheol/Hades/The Grave to be in a sort of Dreamlike state, same with the Martyrs under the Altar in the Throne Room in Revelation 6 at the 5th Seal and later washing their robes in chapter 7.  Which gives me flexibility in how to deal with passages that seem to imply a pre resurrection afterlife.

But more importantly the idea that the Soul is just dead is what Annihilationists tend to believe.

What Jesus says in Matthew 10:28 is important here.

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

Annihilationists like Lex Meyer seem to think this verse proves their position even though it contradicts it.  If the Soul simply dies when the body dies then anyone who can kill the body can kill the Soul.  Instead killing the Soul is something only God can do, and Jesus goes on to assure us God never would do that.  And in John 11:26 Jesus promises us that we will NEVER die.

The New Testament refers to the dead as asleep multiple times.  That’s why I consider Soul Sleep the face value Biblical View and the burden of proof is on those who reject it.  And the verses they most cling to I've already addressed here.

https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2019/09/do-we-have-promise-that-we-will-be-with.html

It’s also the most ancient traditional view being implied in Justin Martyr and explicitly taught by Athenagoras.  It was also the View of the Smyrna-Lyon tradition of Polycarp-Irenaeus and possibly compatible with what Tertullian taught.  Some who actually believe in Soul Sleep may have unwittingly used more Mortalism based language, so I remain unsure what to think of Tatian, Octavius or Marcus Minucius Felix.

The fact that so many mainstream Christians now treat Soul Sleep as a damnable heresy shows how far we’ve fallen into Platonist Error.

Soul Mortalism is still closer to the Biblical Truth then the mainstream view, but I do want the difference to be known as well as that Soul Sleep is where I stand.

Update October 22nd 2024: This Article by a John Anderson provides a large list of times The Dead are referred to as Asleep.

https://www.fulcrum7.com/apologetics/2021/1/29/fifty-four-texts-that-describe-death-as-sleep#:~:text=The%20Bible%20calls%20death%20%E2%80%9Csleep,the%20Mount%20of%20Transfiguration%20(Mat.

That Author probably holds other Beliefs I disagree with, I haven't read the entire website and even in this article takes the ill advised Tactics of quoting Ecclesiastes  at face value, and clearly doesn't seem to believe in Universal Salvation.  But regardless it's a good resource.

So I'm gonna copy/Paste the list of Verses from that article here, he doesn't say which Translation he used but I'm confident the KJV agrees with all of these..

Deuteronomy 31:16: “The Lord said to Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers.”

II Samuel 7:12:  “When thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers.""

I Kings 1:21:  “When my lord the king shall sleep with his fathers.”

I Kings 2:10:  “David slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 11:21:  “David slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 11:43:  “Solomon slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 14:20: “Jeroboam...slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 14:31:  “Rehoboam slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 15:8: “Abijam slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 15:24:  “Asa slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 16:6:  “Baasha slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 16:28:  “Omri slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 22:40:  “Ahab slept with his fathers.”

I Kings 22:50:  “Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers.”

II Kings 8:24:  “Joram slept with his fathers”

II Kings 10:35:  “Jehu slept with his fathers”

II Kings 13:9:  “Jehoahaz slept with his fathers”

II Kings 13:13:  “Joash slept with his fathers”

II Kings 14:16:  “Jehoash slept with his fathers”

II Kings 14:22:  “The king slept with his fathers”

II Kings 14:29:  “Jeroboam slept with his fathers”

II Kings 15:7:  “Azariah slept with his fathers”

II Kings 15:22: “Menahem slept with his fathers”

II Kings 15:38:  “Jotham slept with his fathers”

II Kings 16:20:   “Ahaz slept with his fathers”

II Kings 20:21:  “Hezekiah slept with his fathers”

II Kings 21: 18:  “Manasseh slept with his fathers”

II Kings  24:6:  “Jehoiakim slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 9:31:  “Solomon slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 12:16:  “Rehoaboam slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 14:1:  “Abijah slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 16:13:  “Asa slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 21:1:  “Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 26:2:  “The king slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 26:23:  “Uzziah slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 27:9:   “Jotham slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 28:27:  “Ahaz slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 32:33:  “Hezekiah slept with his fathers”

II Chron. 33:20:  “Manasseh slept with his fathers”

Job 7:21:  “Now shall I sleep in the dust”

Job 14:12:  “They shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep”

Psalm 13:3:  “Lest I sleep the sleep of death”

Psalm 90:5:  “Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep”

Psalm 146:4  “His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” 

Daniel 12:2:  “Many of they that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake”

Jesus described death as “sleep”:

Matthew 9:24:  “The maid is not dead but sleepeth.”

Mark 5:39:  “The damsel is not dead but sleepeth”

Luke 8:52:  “She is not dead but sleepeth”

John 11:11:  “Our friend Lazarus sleepeth”

At Jesus’ crucifixion: 

Matthew 27:52: “Many bodies of the saints which slept arose”

Luke reiterates I Kings:

Acts 13:36:  “David...fell asleep, and was laid unto his fathers”

Paul describes death as sleep:

I Cor. 15:20:  “Christ is risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that sleep”

I Cor. 15:51:  “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed”

I Thess 4:13:  “I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren,  concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope”

I Thess. 4:14:  “If we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus”

And in the comments section 2 Peter 3:4 is added.

The Tribes of Mizraim

 What I want to discus here is how my research into the Tribes of Mizraim named in Genesis 10:13-14 clearly verifies that we are dealing with North Western Africa, even if the name Mizraim itself might be difficult to find there.  Plus I think Khem/Kemet comes from Ham.

Tribes is the term I'm using because strictly speaking Genesis 10 names no sons of Mizraim, they are all tribal designations (the -im suffix) that came from Mizraim.  They could come from names of sons, or names given to regions, or other things.

I should also add that I don't think Josephus's "Ethiopic War" happened, I think that was a myth he or someone before him imagined because they didn't know where to finds the tribes of Mizraim.

I want to start with Patrhos, it is a well documented name for Upper Egypt, particularly the area around Thebes.  It comes from Egyptian pꜣ tꜣ-rsy "the southern land" (e.g., pBritish Museum EA 10375, line 16; cf. Sahidic Coptic ⲡⲁⲧⲟⲩⲣⲏⲥ and Bohairic Coptic ⲡⲁⲑⲟⲩⲣⲏⲥ.^[1][2]).  Isaiah 11:11 lists Pathros between Mizraim and Cush, suggesting that in that context Isaiah is using Mizraim mainly of Lower Egypt.

Caphtor is a complicated subject because of the desire some have to make it Crete or Cyprus or a location in Turkey.  But even Wikipedia ultimately comes down on the side of it being in the Nile Delta region.

The equation of Keftiu with Caphtor commonly features in interpretations that equate Caphtor with Crete, Cyprus, or a locality in Anatolia. Jean Vercoutter in the 1950s had argued, based on an inscription of the tomb of Rekhmire that Keftiu could not be set apart from the "islands of the sea" which he identified as a reference to the Aegean Sea. However in 2003, Vandesleyen pointed out that the term wedj wer (literally "great green") which Vercoutter had translated "the sea" actually refers to the vegetation growing on the banks of the Nile and in the Nile Delta, and that the text places Keftiu in the Nile Delta.^{[Claude Vandersleyen, Keftiu: A Cautionary Note, Oxford Journal of Archaeology, vol 22, issue 2, 2003]}

The Targums and Miamonides refereed to Caphtor as Caphutkia and places it as Damietta on the eastern edge of the Nile Delta near classical Pelusium.  

But the name Caphtor could also be related to Coptos and the Greek Aegyptos and thus Egypt.  They come from Hut-ka-Ptah the name of the Temple Complex of Ptah in Memphis.  There is a Hebrew word spelled and pronounced the same a Kaphtor and translated Knop or Lintel, it's used in The Pentateuch only when describing The Menorah. 

I actually think these two tribes may be enough to account for all of Egypt proper.  Caphtor as Lower Egypt and Pathros as Upper Egypt, Egypt's traditional two great divisions.

The Casluhim are recorded in the inscriptions of the Temple of Kom Ombo as the region name Kasluḥet.  [Archibald Henry Sayce (2009). The "Higher Criticism" and the Verdict of the Monuments. General Books LLC. p. 91.]  Ancient Jewish traditions associated them with Pentapolis aka Cyeneica, suggesting they were the people indigenous to that region before the Greek Colonists came there in Classical times.

As far as the alleged confusion about whether the Philistimes came from Casluhim or Caphtor.  Amos 9:7 refers to their relationship to Capthor as a direct comparison to Israel's relationship with Egypt. So I believe they were Casluhim who had sojourned in Caphtor before eventually settling in the Gaza Strip.

The Lehubim is the name elsewhere contracted to Lubim and the people from who's name comes Libya, a region that at it's broadest Classical Greek definition also included the land of the decedents of Phut, the Berbers in the far west of Africa. 

The three remaining names in Genesis 10:13 I suspect are to be looked for in modern Sudan and Ancient Nubia.

The Naphtuhim may be the namesake of Napata, and/or perhaps via the tendency of B and P to sometimes become confused in etymology Nobatia and Nubia itself.  The Nubians were originally a distinct ethnic group from the Kushites, but the two get conflated a lot making my research difficult.  It seems they were originally further up the Nile from the region Egypt usually called Kush.

I think the name of Anamim/Anemim/Enemim could come from people of Khnum, an Egyptian Deity worshiped on Elaphantine/Syene island near Aswan, but was mythologically viewed as the source of the Nile.  Maybe they were the people of Kerma, or maybe way further south near Tana Kirikos or Lake Victoria.  Or maybe they were the Blemmyes/Blemmues/Balnemmoui?  (Turns out the Blemmyes spoke a Cushetic Language.)  Or Anem could be Akhmim which may have actually been Khent-min.

The Ludim present potential for confusion with the Lud/Lod son of Shem who settled in Turkey commonly known as Lydia (or Lydus in Greek Mythology).  But I think it's the Mizraimite Ludim who are being alluded to in Jeremiah 46:9 and Ezekiel 30:5 with the context there being about Egypt and other nations near Egypt.  Those Ludim are presented as being famed for their Archery which was also the case with the Ancient Nubians.

I think the Mizraimite Ludim were the people of the region known in late Antiquity and medieval times as Alodia which name can be traced back to Ancient Kushite inscriptions as Alut.  Here are some maps of Christian Nubia.

As an extra Biblical Note, I think Makuria is also the land Herodotus knew as Macrobia.

Since I mentioned Phut, Mizraim's brother, above I might as well deal with the documentation on him.

Pliny the Elder Nat. Hist. 5.1 and Ptolemy Geog. iv.1.3 both place the river Phuth on the west side of Mauretania (modern Morocco). Ptolemy also mentions a city Putea in Libya (iv.3.39).  This might be the same river mentioned by other authors under other names being connected to the Atlas Mountains.

Other references seem to place Phut closer to Egypt.  Putaya was the name of the Persian Satrapy of Libya, Nebuchadnezzar refereed to the Cyrenians as the "Putu Yavan" (Ionians in Libya).  I think this location closer to Egypt is probably where Phut first settled, then they migrated further west and their original settlement was taken over by the Casluhim and Lehubim/Lubim.

The notion that Phut and Lubim became different names for the same place is attested by Josephus in AotJ Book 1:6/2.

Egypt as a major Empire and center of Trade located on the crossroads of two continents had a very diverse population. So none of this means other grandsons of Noah didn't also contribute to ancient Egypt.  I still think the Origins of Osiris and Horus could partly lie in the Horite genealogy of Genesis 36 (thus descent from the Hitties and Hivites), as well as that Seb/Keb/Geb could be partly based on one of the three Sebs who were sons of Cush.

The Philistines.

I feel like ranting on this subject a bit.  We now know that the City of Gaza is indeed the oldest of the Philistine Pentapolis, Biblically it's the only one mentioned in Genesis.  We also know the oldest settlement there was an Egyptian Fort built back in the Early Bronze Age.  We also know it was essentially Egypt's regional capital in Canaan during the 18th and Nineteenth Dynasties.  Meaning archeology tells us exactly why The Bible depicted them as essentially Egyptian Colonists.

But the notion that the Philistines weren't in that region till Rameses III, and that they came from the Aegean, continues to pervade because Egyptian records don't use that name till then.  I think Philistines/Peleset was never what they called themselves but always a mostly derogatory term, related to a Hebrew verb used of wallowing in the dust/dirt.  I think the time of Rameses III is simply when these colonials decided to claim independence from their mother empire like the Yankees in 1776, and so only then did the Pharaoh also use this insulting term for them.

But most importantly the Peleset were NOT Sea Peoples in any 20th Dynasty records, scholars like to group then in with the "peoples of the Sea" and "peoples of the Isles" they allied themselves with, but Rameses III did NOT apply that term to the Peleset or the Tjekker.  

If the Philistines post Rameses III seem in their language and fashion and art similar to the Mycenean Greeks, it's because of cultural exchange via the Denyen/Danoi/Danaans they were allied with, not because they originally came from there.

I also read an English Translation of the Peshita where Genesis 10:13-14 says that out of Casluhim came both the Philistines and Caphtorim.

The Bible says the Philistines main patron Deity was Dagan, this is somewhat a mystery since Dagan is in the standard Canaanite pantheon but not a major player. And Archeologists haven't found the evidence for this, partly because they only count anything as Philistine starting with Rameses III.  We know the Egyptians tended to syncretize storm gods like Baal/Hadad with Set.  So Dagan might have been the Canaanite deity who was identified with Osiris or maybe Amon.

I have also come to think about how the nature Hebrew winds sometimes using the names for in fact peoples or locations and started to consider that maybe the Philistim of the Table of Nations has nothing to do with the later Biblical Philistines was a reference to Pelusium.