Red Ochre and Red Deer at Ancient Burial Sites

Alice C. Linsley


The red deer that are native to western Europe and Africa were an important symbol among the prehistoric populations of England and Wales. Red deer (Cervus elaphus) are the largest native land animal found in the UK. The stags are larger than the hinds (females), and have wide branching antlers. The coat is reddish-brown in summer.

Red deer antlers were used in rituals and the red colored hides were used to bury the dead. The hides may have served a symbolic blood just as in other places nobles were buried covered in red ochre.

A New York Times article states:

New radiocarbon dates from human cremation burials among and around the brooding stones on Salisbury Plain in England indicate that the site was used as a cemetery from 3000 B.C. until after the monuments were erected around 2500 B.C., British archaeologists reported Thursday.

“It’s now clear that burials were a major component of Stonehenge in all its main stages,” said Mike Parker Pearson, an archaeologist at the University of Sheffield in England.  (Read it all here.)

The number of cremated bones found at Stonehedge is not large, suggesting that this burial site may have been reserved for high-ranking persons. This made me think of the burial sites of noble persons who were covered in red ochre.

What I find most interesting about this report is the discovery of a red deer antler. Indeed this may be a clue to understanding Stonehedge.

The New York Times report goes on to say, “In other recent findings at Stonehenge and adjacent sites, archaeologists uncovered a piece of a red-deer antler that was apparently used as a pick for digging. It was found in what is known as the Stonehenge Greater Cursus, a cigar-shaped ditched enclosure nearly two miles long that is thought to have a sacred significance. Julian Thomas, an archaeologist at the University of Manchester, who led this investigation, said the antler was dated at 3630 to 3375 B.C. That puts the cursus about 1,000 years before the large stones were erected, meaning, he said, that “this landscape maintains its significance over a long period of time.”

The red deer antler may have been used as a digging tool, but more likely it is part of a ceremonial mask or head dress. British archeologists are aware that long before Stonehedge was erected, ancient inhabitants of the British Isles used such head dresses in religious ceremonies dating back to 9,500 BC. At Starr Carr, 21 such red deer skulls with antlers were discovered. All had holes that would have been used to tie them to the head with a leather thong for ceremonial use. For more on this go here.

The Red Deer of Europe, western Asia and North Africa is a distinct species from the red elk of eastern Asia and North America. The discovery of red-deer antlers at the site suggests a connection to the older Mesolithic (9,500 year old) Star Carr community in North Yorkshire England. These red stag and hinds roamed from North Africa to Ireland. The red color symbolized revitalizing blood for Africans (and many other tribal peoples) and may have had the same significance for the ancient inhabitants of the British Isles. That would explain the presence of red-deer antlers at Stonehedge. A parallel is the burial of non-cremated  rulers in red ochre dust. The rulers of the ancient Maya were burial in cinnabar dust. (Read more here.)

"In European art, color is generally understood in terms of the primary colors red, yellow and blue," says Karen Milbourne, an expert in African art. "But throughout much of Africa, the primary colors are red, white and black. They don't mean the same thing to every group, but they appear over and over again."

According to Milbourne, the color white signifies the spirit world of the ancestors, procreative power, and the nurturing quality of mother's milk. Black connotes the unknown or the mysterious. Red signifies the blood shed in warfare, hunting, animal sacrifice and in childbirth. Among many ancient peoples, burying dead rulers in red ochre expressed the hope that they would have life beyond the grave where they would interceed for their people before the Creator. This practice has been observed in burial sites in Czechoslovakia, Wales, France, and Australia.

For more on the ancient Britons' connection to Wales and reverence for their ancestors, go here.

To understand the metaphysical implications of the color red and blood, go here.


Related reading:  Mining Blood; Life is in the Blood; The Scarlet Cord; The Pleromic Blood and Gnosticism; The Pleromic Blood and Gender Distinctions; What Constitutes Being?

Polygamy: Silent Social Challenge

Alice C. Linsley

Polygamy is against the law in the United States and rarely prosecuted, unless it involves sexual abuse of minors. The recent intervention in the case of the Fundamentalist Church of the Latter Day Saints in Texas is about sex with minors, not polygamy. In fact, state officials in Utah, Arizona, and Texas are reluctant to prosecute polygamy cases. It means wading into religious waters and Constitutional challenges.

The religious justification for polygamy is found in the Old Testament. It was the practice for Afro-Asiatic chiefs to have 2 wives living in separate households on a north-south axis. These wives marked out the boundaries of the chief’s territory. Sometimes there were also concubines, but these women did not have the social status of the 2 wives. Abraham’s father, Terah, had 2 wives. By one wife he had Abraham and Nahor. By the other wife he had Sarah (Abraham’s first wife) and Haran. Abraham also had 2 wives: Sarah and Keturah. Isaac had 2 wives and so did Jacob. (For more on this read this.)

There is no evidence that all the men of Abraham’s culture had 2 wives. It appears to have been the case for the first born sons of rulers, those sons who would take over their fathers’ territories. So while there is no doubt that polygyny (multiple wives) was practiced by biblical figures, it was a custom of rulers, not the common man. It served to build up a man’s kingdom. And this is exactly what polygamist leaders in the US are attempting to do.

While state officials waffle in their thinking on the issue, polygamy silently spreads across the US among Moslems. According to a recent NPR report, Moslems in polygamous relationships number between 50,000 to 100,000. Legal challenges are avoided because only one of these marriages is officially recognized by the state. The other marriages are religious ceremonies not recognized by the state. In many cases, Moslem men maintain wives in the US and in their homelands.

These unofficial marriages are often secret, and the second and third wives are without legal rights or protections. There are many incidents of abuse by both the husband and his first wife.

For more, read the NPR article here.

Yes, Georgia, there is a Kingdom!

Alice C. Linsley

In our study of The Biblical Theme of Two Sons we discovered that the number 2 symbolizes binary oppositions, territory and boundaries. This theme is fundamental to the Biblical worldview. It is found in the order of creation: night and day, waters above and waters below, seas and dry land, male and female. It is found in the theme of 2 sons, and it is reflected in the bi-consonantal languages of central Africa from which Abraham’s ancestors came.

Genesis reflects the ancient metaphysics and practices of Abraham's Horite ancestors. Their's was a world quite removed from our post-modern materialist world. As heirs of the Enlightenment and empiricism we want evidence to back up statements about the figures in the Bible. The fact that the text does not come out and tell us that all the rulers in Genesis 4, 5 and 11 had 2 wives might trouble us, but this would not have been a problem for Abraham’s Horite people, since it was customary for Horite rulers to have 2 wives. In fact, the neglect of mentioning Isaac's first wife would have stirred their interest. They would be compelled to investigate why this break in the generations long kinship pattern? Mysteries interest Semitic peoples, as do number symbolism, binary oppositions, and reversals. This is the basis of Jacques Derrida's method and also that of St. Ephrem, the Syrian.

In our study of the significance of The Theme of Hidden Sons we discovered that the number 3 symbolizes realities that are not readily apparent. Just as Abraham needed 2 wives to establish himself in the land, so Isaac needed 2 wives to maintain the territory. With 2 wives we are now able to see that Isaac had 3 sons: Jacob and Esau by Rebecca, and by his first wife a son who is not named in the text. Here the theme of a 'hidden son" appears for the first time. We had to dig into Scripture to find the hidden third. We had to discover the pattern before we even knew to look for the anomaly. Anomalies speak to us of mysteries such as The Incarnate Word, a Son begotten of God, death trampled down by death, the Trinity.

The number 3 is repeatedly found in connection to the most astonishing acts of God. Jonah was 3 days in the belly of the whale. Moses was hidden for 3 months (Ex. 2:2). Job's 3 friends struggled with the mystery of why the righteous suffer. Moses asked permission to go 3 days journey into the wilderness to worship. Abraham traveled 3 days to a mountain only God could reveal and upon which God provided His own sacrifice. The Covenant God made with Abraham involved cutting up 3 animals that were 3 years old. The visit by 3 "Men" to Abraham's tent. The 3 measures of flour made into cakes for those Visitors. The 3 gifts offered them: curds, milk and a calf. Abraham prayed 3 times for Sodom. Joseph had a dream of a vine with 3 branches (Gen 40:10-12). The “Son of Man” appeared with 3 men in the fiery furnace. Jesus rose on the third day. The Afro-Asiatics even had a trinitarian name for God -"Baal Shalisha" (The 3 God).

The number 3 also symbolizes unity in the Scriptures. This is represented in familial triads:

Cain Abel Seth (Gen. 4-5)
Ham Japeth Shem (Gen. 5-9)
Og Gog Magog (Gen. 10, Nu. 21:33)
Haran Nahor Abraham (Gen. 11-12)
Ishmael Jokshan Isaac (Gen. 16, 21, 25)
Jeush Jalam Korah (Gen. 36: 4-18)
Lehab Lesha Letu (Gen. 10:6-19, Gen. 25:3)
Dedan Tema Buz (Jeremiah 25)

The 3 sons have one father (or a common paternal ancestor). The husband and his 2 wives are one territory, one kingdom. All of this is about Christ's Kingdom and the revealing of the Hidden Son of Man.

Georgia (a reader of Just Genesis) has asked, "Does Christ presently have two wives?” The short answer is that Christ has 2 brides, not 1 divided bride. To express this another way: the Good Shepherd has two flocks grazing in different pastures, but both belong to Him. As He has said, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one Shepherd." (John 10:16)

The Church is one flock and the other flock are those who died in expectation of Messiah's appearing. The last of that generation were Simeon, Anna and John the Baptist. They are the 3 witnesses to the Kingdom's appearing. Simeon, a priest, represents the Blood, Anna, a prophetess, represents the Spirit, and John the Forerunner represents the Water. These are the 3 witnesses to which John alludes when he tells us "This is He who came by water and blood - Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and these three agree as one." (1 John 5:6-8)


Related reading:  Did Jesus Have a Wife?; The Kingdom of God in Genesis; No Kingdom By Deception

Mother of Seven Sons

“The mother of seven will grow faint and breathe her last. She will die, ashamed and humiliated, while it is still daylight” (Jeremiah 15:9).

In ancient Israel, the symbolism of giving birth to seven children was used as a proverbial expression to describe a woman blessed with children or to refer to a family whose future in Israel was guaranteed because the family name would survive in the memory of the community through the sons.

Two classic examples of “mother of seven” appear in the Old Testament.When Hanna was delivered from her barrenness and gave birth to Samuel, she said: “The barren has borne seven” (1 Samuel 2:5). These words reflect Hannah’s joy in becoming a mother and the awareness that she had conceived a son because of God’s help.

The second example is found in Ruth 4:15. After Ruth married Boaz and gave birth to Obed, the women of Bethlehem paid her the highest compliment by telling Naomi that her daughter-in-law Ruth was better “than seven sons.” This recognition spoke highly of Ruth’s character since being a mother of seven sons was the highest accolade a woman in Israel could receive.

Read it all at the Lobster Pot, here.

The Motif of Hidden Sons

Alice C. Linsley

Having considered the biblical theme of 2 sons, we now turn to the equally important theme of 3 sons. The recurrence of 3 sons is less evident because this theme is under the surface and must be mined. The number 3 represents unity so seeing the bigger picture of Abraham's people requires looking at all 3 sons. In some case the 3 sons can be identified as a tribal unit by the similarities of their names. Consider these examples:

Three of Jacob's sons by Zilpah are Jimnah, Jishvah and Jishvi (Gen. 46:17). Here we see the alliterative naming so typical of the Horites clans.  Abraham's sons Yitzak (Isaac), Yishbak and Yishmael (Ishmael) are another example. Another example is Magog, Gog and Og, which also represents a tribal unity.

We find the 3-son configuration throughout Genesis, though not all involve alliterative names.

Gen. 4 - Cain, Abel, Seth
Gen. 4 - Jubal, Jabal, Tubal
Gen. 7 - Ham, Shem, Japheth
Gen. 11 - Haran, Nahor, Abraham
Gen. 22 - Huz, Uz, Buz

To this we must add the first-born sons of Abraham: Ishmael (by the concubine Hagar), Isaac (by his sister-wife Sarah) and Jokshan (by his cousin wife Keturah). The birth order is not clear, which is strange given the importance of primogeniture among Abraham’s people. We are told that Ishmael was born first, but rejected as the heir upon Sarah's insistence, though she had arranged the situation. It is not clear that Ishmael would have been heir to Abraham's office as chief, even with Sarah's scheme, especially if Keturah's son Joktan was born first.

We are told that Sarah couldn't conceive, but finally bore Isaac in her old age. Meanwhile, the order of the narrative implies that Abraham married Keturah after Sarah died, which can't be the case, since it was the pattern among Abraham's people for chiefs to maintain 2 wives in separate households at the northern and southern boundaries of their territories. Sarah was in Hebron and Keturah was in Beersheba to the south. That Abraham was recognized as a chief among the people is evident in Genesis 23:5 where the Hittites speak of Abraham as "a prince of God" among them.

So the question remains, who was Abraham's first-born son? My guess is Joktan, the first-born of Keturah, and that Abraham acquired Keturah as a wife when he went to the Negev (Gen. 12:9) after consulting the moreh (prophet) at the Oak in Mamre (Gen. 12:6).

The number 3 is a taunting symbol. It compels us to seek the hidden, just as Abraham sought guidance about his unknown future. At this very place in Mamre, he later looked up and saw 3 “men” coming to him and ordered 3 measures of flour to make cakes.  He brought to his visitors 3 gifts: curds, milk and a calf. And Abraham interceded for Sodom 3 times (Gen. 18).

Consider the mystery surrounding Isaac. On the surface there appears to be so little information about Isaac, compared to Abraham and Jacob. This led some biblical scholars to speculate that Isaac may be a fictional character, created to bridge the generations. We may dismiss this theory since Genesis provides more information about Isaac than is generally recognized and what we are given could not have been invented, nor could it be the product of an editor. The key to discovery is the seeking of the hidden third son.

The text presents us with this picture of Isaac: He had two wives, as did his father and his father’s father, Terah. Rebecca was his cousin wife and his first wife who was a half-sister (again following his father and grandfather) lived in the area of Beersheba (that is the "well of Sheba"). This is where Abraham settled after his experience at Mt. Moriah (Gen. 22:19). Isaac’s rule in Beersheba is evident in Gen. 26 where we are told that he reopened the wells dug by his father between Beersheba and Gerar. This explains why Abraham’s servant brought Rebecca to Beersheba rather than to Hebron, the home of Isaac’s mother.

There is a suggestion in the genealogical data that Isaac’s first wife was named Judith. This name is the feminine equivalent of Judah.

Just as Abraham needed 2 wives to establish himself in the land, so Isaac needed 2 wives to maintain the territory. The picture becomes clearer when we imagine Judith in Beersheba and Rebecca in the area of Hebron. We are now able to speculate that Isaac had 3 sons: Jacob and Esau by Rebecca, and by Judith a son who is not named in the text. However, since the kinship of Abraham’s people traces lineage through the father and the mother, this pushes the line of Judah back several generations. It also establishes a connection between the Aramaic house of Terah and the Hamitic house of Sheba.

Revisiting Gen. 10 and Gen. 11:10-26, we find confirmation of this connection. Terah and Sheba are descendents of Eber’s two sons Peleg and Joktan. Terah descends from Peleg and Sheba from Joktan. Now where have we heard that name “Joktan” before? This is the name of one of Abraham’s 3 sons, born of his cousin bride Keturah, who dwelt at the Well of Sheba. He is a hidden third son, and probably Abraham's first-born.

The motif of the hidden son is Christological.  The Son of God is the Holy One hidden and revealed.


Related reading:  The Holy One Hidden and Revealed

For related information, go here and here.

The Biblical Theme of Two Sons

Alice C. Linsley

The best way to appreciate the biblical narrative is to honor the story as a meaningful whole while investigating the smaller supportive details.

Some commentaries on Genesis cut the whole into pieces to get at what is inside. This seems an impatient mode of operating. I'm reminded of a problem I occasionally encounter when trying to open the large dog food bags with white stitching across the top. To open the bag properly one must find the right end of the string, jiggle it a bit and pull in a straight line. If you try to rip from the wrong end or yank at an odd angle, the bag won't open. If at this point you become frustrated and take scissors to the bag you will get at what's inside, but you will have destroyed the integrity of the whole.

Cutting the whole into pieces leads to skepticism about the text because the pieces no longer possess a natural arrangement. We are unable then to see the relationship of the pieces. This is like trying to make sense of a person's dream while insisting that parts of the dream belong to someone else. Biblical narratives have a complexity similar to dreams. They have their own logic involving symbol and structure. Many of the same cognitive approaches used in interpreting dreams can be used to interpret biblical narratives. Attention must be given to symbolic details in the dream, but the greater narrative always must be kept in sight and kept intact.

The biblical theme of 2 sons requires just this approach of preserving the integrity of the whole while exploring the genealogical details.

Let us begin by looking at the Old Testament picture which reveals murder, jealousy and conflict between brothers and the two first-born sons. The following list suffices to help us grasp something of the scope of this theme. Two sons comprise an essential element in the following narratives:

Cain and Abel (interesting Bantu parallels to Cain's murder of Abel)
Cain and Seth
Eber's sons, Peleg and Joktan
Abraham and Nahor
Moab and Ammon
Ishmael and Isaac
Jacob and Esau
Simeon and Levi
Judah and Joseph
Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manessah
Rueben and Judah
Judah’s sons, Perez and Zerah
Moses and Aaron
Moses’ sons, Eleazar and Gershom
Naomi’s 2 sons who died in Moab
Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phinehas

In the New Testament we have James and John, and Andrew and Peter, and at least 2 parables involving 2 sons.

This list, while not comprehensive, is adequate to illustrate the scope and recurrence of the theme of 2 sons. Clearly, the biblical narrative derives structure from this theme. However, it would be erroneous to conclude that these were the only sons born at a time before birth control and when fecundity was highly valued. We must remember that Nahor had 8 sons (Gen. 22:20-24) and Abraham had 8, if we add them all together. We remember also that Jesse had 8 sons, the youngest being David.

Let us return to the analogy of the dog food bag. Analysis and proper interpretation require finding the right end of the string: key words, recurring images, or genealogical patterns that allow us to get inside to what Carl Jung called the “ah hah moment.” In other words, the Bible requires a certain amount of intuitive investigation. Such is the case in examination of the 2 sons theme. Let us now turn to a specific case.

Speiser could not see the natural relationship of the Judah-Tamar-Joseph narrative because he wasn’t looking at the bigger picture. Instead he was focusing on documentary threads, following the Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis. Thus he wrote concerning Genesis 38, “The narrative is a completely independent unit. It has no connection with the drama of Joseph which it interrupts…” (E.A. Speiser, The Anchor Bible Commentary on Genesis, p. 299).

By looking at the whole, we see that the placement of the story of Judah and Tamar is not an interruption of the Joseph narrative, but rather a key to understanding that story. Both narratives are about the loss of 2 sons and the gain of 2 sons. Jacob lost Joseph and then Benjamin to Egypt, but gained Perez and Zerah in Canaan. Both stories are about the loss of sons and God’s action to restore. The loss of Joseph and Benjamin in Egypt was temporary and foreshadows the Egyptian captivity of Israel. The gain of Perez and Zerah in Canaan foreshadows the dynasty of David and the coming of Messiah. Chapter 38 constitutes a bridge between two settings of divine action: Egypt and Canaan. It reminds us to seek God's working out of salvation in more than one place.

Joseph would have been about 26 at the time that Judah’s first born son married Tamar. This son died and the next oldest was enlisted to marry Tamar according to the law of levirate marriage. The second son also died and Judah was reluctant to have another son involved with Tamar so he sent her home to her “father’s house” in Edom. Judah, like his father Jacob, lost two sons. The key here is the term “father’s house” – the opposite of Naomi’s words to her daughters-in-law. Naomi told them to return to their “mother’s house” which was a way of urging them to remarry. Judah, on the other hand, by sending Tamar to her “father’s house” condemned her to widowhood and broke the law. He knew what he was doing because later he admits that Tamar is more righteous then he.

So after losing 2 sons, Judah gained 2 sons and his rule was amplified through Perez from whom would come Israel's greatest king and the promised Messiah.

The theme of loss, restoration and amplification is lifted up when Joseph presents his sons to his father. Then Israel said to Joseph, "I did not think I should ever see you again, and now God has let me see your children as well." (Gen. 48:11)

The theme of 2 sons also involves reversals. Consider the repetition of the blessing of the younger son over the older.

When Israel saw Joseph’s two sons, he asked ‘Who are these?’ ‘They are my sons whom God has given me here,’ Joseph told his father. ‘Then bring them to me,’ he said, ‘so that I may bless them.’ (Gen. 48: 8). Joseph presents his older son to Jacob’s right hand and is surprised when old Jacob lays his right hand on the younger and his left hand on the older. Just as Jacob received the first born's blessing, now he bestows it upon his youngest. This theme is found in extra biblical sources also.

Consider the Falasha account of the death of Moses. Moses wife “went weeping and said to the children: ‘Go to your father before he dies, for you shall see him no more.’ She awakened them from their sleep and brought them, holding their hands in her right and left hands and said to them: ‘Weep over your father, for you and he must part… Look well at your father until you be satisfied, for soon you will be parted.’ When they saw their father they fell on their faces and wept with a great weeping. Moses wept with them… [and] he put his younger son Eleazar on his right knee and his older son Gershom on his left and he blessed them.” (Falasha Anthology. Yale University Press. p. 110).

Such reversals in the Scriptures must be taken seriously as clues to meaning. Reversals indicate that God is acting both here and now and also in another place and time. The Judah-Tamar story is an example. It points out that God is working in two places: Egypt and Canaan. The Judah drama in Canaan parallels the Joseph drama in Egypt. We see this alluded to in the mention of the women’s association with sacred shrines. Joseph’s wife, Anath, was the daughter of the priest of the shrine at On (Heliopolis) and Tamar dressed herself as a shrine prostitute.

Tamar is the most famous female ancestor of David. She is mentioned in Genesis and in Ruth. Her name means date nut palm, a symbol of fertility, prosperity and strength. Honoring this ancestor, Solomon made her hometown in Edom one of his 7 fortified cities. Tamar is to Edom what Anath is to Egypt. Both women had 2 sons and in both cases, the younger son was elevated above the older.

What lesson are we to take away from this exploration of the theme of two sons? God is not restricted by customs of primogeniture. He blesses whom He chooses and his blessings extend in all directions. So it is with the youngest of Terah's sons, Abraham, that God forms an everlasting covenant through which all the peoples of the Earth will be blessed, and it is to the youngest of Jesse's sons that the throne of Israel is given that the scepter might pass to the eternal Messiah.

St Augustine on Divine Illumination

The following is an excerpt from David Bradshaw’s address on Christianity East and West: Some Philosophical Differences presented at Asbury College, November 1999. Dr. Bradshaw is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Kentucky. He summarizes the basic differences between the Augustinian, Thomistic, and Greek patristic traditions, viewing them in relation to their common sources in Plato. The full text may be read here.

“St. Augustine agreed with Plato that concepts like "one" and “large” need special explanation. Being a Christian, however, he could not accept that prior to our lives on earth our souls exist in the heavens and have there a direct perception of the Forms. So he found a different answer. As a Christian, he knew that Jesus Christ had claimed to be Truth incarnate. He also knew that, according to the Gospel of John, Jesus--that is, the Word of God, the second person of the Trinity--is "the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world" (1:9). Could there be an answer to Plato's question in the Scriptural teaching that the Word of God is Light and Truth? Augustine thought so. He reasoned that we would not have access even to simple concepts like "one" were it not for a continual illumination of our minds by the second person of the Trinity, whom in this context he usually referred to as the divine Wisdom. This illumination is not a special gift given to some; it is a precondition for the normal operation of the mind. Without it, any thought involving even elementary concepts like "one"--any thought that goes beyond the fleeting contents of sense experience--would be impossible.

Augustine did not stop there. Jesus claims not simply to be the Truth, but to be "the Way, the Truth, and the Life." That means that the presence of divine Wisdom to the mind is not just a precondition for normal understanding; it is a precondition for moral understanding, for recognition of the true Way in whom we find life eternal. This moral illumination operates at several levels. One is that it enables us to recognize qualities such as beauty, justice, wisdom, and goodness. Plato had noted that these have the same "is and is not" character as "one" and "large"; they therefore require the same kind of special explanation. A second level at which moral illumination operates is that it gives us knowledge of eternal moral truths. Nowadays, of course, we tend to be skeptical that there are eternal moral truths. I confess that Augustine’s example seems to me like a pretty good one: "a life that cannot be swayed by any adversity from its fixed and upright resolve is better than one that is easily weakened and overthrown by transitory misfortunes."[i] Since a truth of this sort cannot simply be inferred from sense experience, we must know it by the operation of divine Wisdom. Finally, at a third level, divine Wisdom "stamps" us with a notion of happiness or beatitude. All of our acts are aimed at achieving a condition that we have never fully experienced and probably never will experience within our present lives. Augustine thought that this was another indication of how God is present at the very heart of our moral reasoning.

Now the odd thing about the illumination of the mind by divine Wisdom is that, though we all have it, we do not recognize it for what it is. God is present to us in every thought we think and every action we make; but we are not present to Him. You might say that we have "forgotten" Him, if by this you mean, not that we have lost a knowledge we once had, but that we fail to be aware of something immediately present. It is the same kind of forgetting as when we say, "I forgot myself." Augustine in his great work, On the Trinity, explores at length the connection between "memory" (in this special sense), knowledge of self, and knowledge of God. He finds within the soul two images of the Trinity. One consists of the mind, its knowledge of itself, and its love of itself.[ii] These three are a single substance, for if the mind knows itself perfectly and loves itself perfectly, then the content of those two acts is nothing other than the mind itself. The knowledge and love are not present in the mind as accidents in a subject; they are constitutive activities, which by their presence make manifest what the mind already is. The second image consists of the mind's memory of God (using "memory" in the special sense I have explained), its knowledge of God, and its love of God.[iii] Here again are three conditions or activities, each different, yet the same in substance. Indeed, the first trinity in the soul is rooted and grounded in the second. Any mind that truly knows itself also knows God, who is the condition of its understanding; any mind that truly loves itself also loves God, who is its ultimate end. Properly speaking, we should not speak of self-knowledge or self-love at all, for within and behind the self there is always God.

I hope this will be enough to give you a sense of what the Augustinian way of doing philosophy is like. It is introspective, meditative, and psychologically acute. Augustine never doubts the reality of God; what he doubts is whether he knows God, and, consequently, whether he knows himself. He seeks to find God by finding himself and to find himself by finding God. Many, many thinkers in the western tradition—St. Anselm, St. Bonaventure, Calvin, Descartes, John Henry Newman, and C.S. Lewis, to name just a few—have drunk deeply at this Augustinian well.”

[i]. Augustine, On Free Choice of the Will, tr. Thomas Williams (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1993), 51.
[ii]. De Trinitate IX.4.
[iii]. D.T. XIV.12

Ancient Law Codes

Alice C. Linsley


Understanding Abraham's power as a ruler requires determining the social controls that he exercised. When thinking of his context we must not imagine an extensive realm governed by law codes such as would characterize ancient Babylon. Abraham's exercise of power reflects an older pattern closer to that found in the Law of Tehut, but before we explore that pattern we must consider the function of ancient law codes.

Anthropologists recognize social controls in three categories: folkways, mores andl. Law codes, such as the Code of Hammurapi and the older Law of Tehut, pertain to the last category.

Stone inscriptions and inscriptions on oven-baked clay tablets were a common means of recording information in the ancient world. Ancient codes appealed to a high authority for their validity. The Code of Hammurapi was engraved on a stele more than 7 feet high. At the top of this stele appears an image of King Hammurapi standing reverently before the seated Shamash, the god of justice. Shamash is dictating the law to his earthly representative.

Many of these documents had colophons. Colophons are statements at the end of the document that identify the source and purpose of the document. Thus, the Code of Hammurapi closes with the statement, "The righteous laws which Hammurapi, the wise king, has established . . . ." Similarly, Leviticus closes with this statement: “These are the commandments which YHWH commanded Moses for the children of Israel . . ." and the colophon of Numbers states: “These are the commandments and the ordinances which YHWH commanded by the hand of Moses unto the children of Israel . . ." (36:13)

As was observed by Percy J. Wiseman (1888-1948), the colophon coming at the end serves two purposes: it is a title page and a marker to connect one tablet to the next in a narrative sequence. Wiseman’s theory of the composition of Genesis is presented in his book, New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis (1936). The book has undergone several editions, and the most recent appeared with the title Ancient Records and the Structure of Genesis (Thomas Nelson, 1985), and was edited by Wiseman’s son, Donald J. Wiseman (University of London). There is merit to Wiseman's theory and I recommend the book, although I disagree with his conclusion that Moses is the central figure around whom the Genesis material came together.

Following Wiseman’s method of comparing ancient Near Eastern texts, I would expand our sights to include the ancient Hindu or Vedic literature, which also employed colophons and told of the founders of the world in a similar manner. I suggest that these texts and the ancient Near Eastern texts share a common Afro-Asiatic cultural milieu. The interaction of Afro-Asiatic peoples through written communication is well established. Mesopotamian cuneiform was understood in Egypt, as testified by the Akkadian Tell el-Amarna letters (c. 1400-1353 B.C.) and in Canaan.

One of Wiseman’s most interesting observations is the stylistic change in the sequence after the colophon of Tablet VI which is "the history of Terah" (11:27a). The colophon appears to end the previous section, but does not seem to be connected to what follows. At this point the editor wants to take the text in a different direction. The result is that we lose sight of the fact that Terah is the great Patriarch of all the peoples listed from Abraham onward. (We will see the significance of this when we consider David's lineage.)

Widespread practice of written law codes is characteristic of the great kingdoms that arose after the time of Abraham. They represent a means of social control less typical of the social controls based on kinship and the notion of deification of the ruler.

The oldest known law code is that of Tehut which relflects the Nilotic context and Abraham and his Kushite ancestors.  It is the law code that should be studied to better understand the social controls of the ancient Kushites and their Horite priests.


Related reading:  The Law of Tehut

Noah's Flood: Forces Beyond Our Control

Alice C. Linsley


According to researchers from the Universities of Exeter, UK and Wollongong, Australia, the collapse 8000 years ago of the Laurentide Ice Sheet in North America resulted in a catastrophic rise in global sea level. There is little doubt that this is true. However, it is less likely to have caused the flood of Noah than seismic events and climate changes closer to Noah’s home in Africa. To understand those events we must step back even further in geological history to the formation of the Great African Rift about 20,000,000 years ago.

The Rift began to form as the Earth’s crust rifted. Rifting is the subsidence of land through faulting, and in this case the rifting was major and took place in phases. The first phase created the Great Rift Valley when the African and Arabian tectonic plates pulled apart. The second phase began about 15,000,000 years ago. In this phase, violent tectonic shifting caused central and eastern Africa to pull away from the rest of the continent. This left a long Y-shaped valley filled with lakes and volcanoes. The valley became an inland sea which drained and refilled several times over thousands of years. This is one reason the Albertine Rift is such an extraordinarily diverse ecosystem.

The eastern arm of the Y-shaped valley stretches from Lebanon and North Syria, through the Red Sea, through Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, to Mozambique. The western arm, known as the Albertine Rift, extends through Congo, Uganda, Urwanda, and Urundi, and links up with the eastern arm in Tanzania. The Great Rift runs for 6000 miles, making it the longest valley in the world. It is also one of the deepest and the hottest and driest places on Earth. But this was not the situation in Noah’s time.

The flood of Noah likely occurred during the Guirian Wet Period, which lasted from about 5500 to 2550 B.C. This period is marked by 500 years of persistent, heavy rains that transformed the Nile into a wild river with mile deep gorges. During this time the lands surrounding Lake Chad were spongy and there was great flooding at the confluence of the Niger, Benue, and Osimili Rivers in modern Nigeria. The floodwaters created a disaster of such proportions that it is still remembered. Rainbows would have been a common sight over the region due to rising mists.

In Noah’s time, about 8000 years ago, the Chadic Sea was more than 600 feet deep in most regions and covered over 154,400 square miles of central Africa before draining into the Atlantic Ocean via the Benue River. The floor of the Chad basin intersects with the ancient Mega-Chad basin in the northeastern portion of Lake Chad at the lowest point of the lake called the Djourab Depression. Mega-Chad was an ancient sea that influenced the formation of the Chad basin because the basins of the sea and the lake overlap in some areas. This conjoined sea and lake sustained extensive boating and fishing industries. The average fishermen used dugout canoes, an example of which is the 8000 year old Dufuna Boat, excavated in 1987 in northeast Nigeria. The nobles used boats constructed of marsh reeds lashed together and sealed with pitch (such as appears on this blog’s masthead). Noah, as the ruler of this territory, would have had many boats.

Around the time that Noah lived the already wet region suffered the effects of a volcanic explosion on the floor of the western edge of the Red Sea. The eruption caused earthquakes and even more flooding. The loss of life among the peoples living in the region of Lake Chad was so great as to become mythic.

The fact that the Bible gives us 2 flood accounts should not cause us to doubt the historicity of Noah and the great flood. Remembering that Genesis comes from the Afro-Asiatic peoples whose former dominion extended from the Atlantic coast of modern Nigeria to the Indus River Valley, we should not be surprised to have a western (African) version of the story and an eastern (Mesopotamian) version.

For more on Noah's Flood and Noah's ark, go here and here.