Saturday, December 26, 2009
A Series Worth Mention
The first in the series treats the dating of Herod's rule, the second concerns the dating of Christ's Nativity, and the third deals with the Star of Bethlehem.
Friday, December 25, 2009
Egypt in the Christmas Narrative
The Apostles, who knew Jesus' mother well, bore witness to the Virgin birth of Jesus Christ, so when people reject the virgin birth, they are calling the Apostles liars. They are rejecting the most fundamental belief of Christianity: that the Son of God came into the world to save sinners, to crush the head of the serpent, and to restore Paradise, according to the Edenic Promise (Gen. 3:15)
The Virgin Birth is one of many signs that the One born to Mary is the Son of God, the long-awaited Messiah. This is not about the birth of the Sun at the winter solstice. This is not a reworking of the Egyptian tale of Isis, a fertility goddess. Rather, the Horite Hebrew priests of Egypt told a story about a divinely appointed woman, Hathor, who was the mother of Horus. The Ra-Horus-Hathor narrative provides the pattern that points to Jesus Messiah. It points us to the Virgin who gave birth to the true Son of God under humble circumstances.
In the Horus story, Hathor gives birth in a cave. The hill country of Bethlehem ihas many caves where the residents kept their livestock. Messiah was born in one of these caves. This is why Orthodoxy icons of the Nativity show the Theotokos with the infant Christ in a cave.
Miraculous or extraordinary births abound in ancient societies, such as Athena's birth from Zeus's forehead. But the birth of Jesus is unlike these in significant ways. As Scripture attests: He was not begotten by the will of man. He is the eternal Christ, begotten before all worlds, and his coming was foretold long before there were Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans and Egyptians.
The Egyptians, who venerated the Sun as the emblem of the Creator, believed that Horus was born at the Winter Solstice because from that day forward the Sun grows in strength. An ancient Horite ritual involved placing a male baby before the image of Hathor. Gifts were placed before them by the priests. Such correspondences have led some to claim that Christianity is a copycat religion. However, the beliefs of the Horite Hebrew are the source of our Messianic hope. Christianity has deep roots in antiquity. It is not an invention. Christ is the true Form of which the Hathor-Horus myth is a dim, but prophetic reflection. "And he became flesh and dwelt among us - Emmanuel - God with us!"
Through many generations, Abraham's Horite people expected the Edenic Promise to be fulfilled. The Horites were devotees of Horus, who they called the "Son of God." If we believe Genesis is the record of Abraham's ancestors, then we must also accept that it was to Abraham's ancestors that the original promise (Protevangelion/Proto-Gospel) of the Son's birth was made. This also explains why the priestly lines of Abraham's people exclusively intermarried. They actually believed that the "Seed of a Woman" (Gen. 3:15) would come from their bloodlines.
Descent without a male parent is prefigured in Genesis 3:15 where the promise is given of One who will destroy the cosmic serpent and restore perfect communion between God and Man. The promise involves the woman's seed, not the man’s, and the promise involves “the woman,” not Eve. Gen 3:15 looks forward to the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God. And the fulfillment is facilitated by Joseph’s obedience to God and his faithfulness to Mary. Not only did he refuse to put her to shame, “but he knew her not.” The words are a euphemism, expressing the conjugal act, and reflect on the union of First Man and First Woman in Gen. 4:1.
Further, Joseph listened and believed the angel's warning. He took Mary and the Child to safety in Egypt. Egypt isn't always posed as a safe place in Israel's history, but for Abraham's divine Seed, Egypt was a place of refuge, as it was for Abraham and Jacob in a time of famine. The "angel of the Lord" appeared to Joseph and told him to seek refuge in Egypt. This phrase - "angel of the Lord" - is found in Genesis 16:7 in reference to the Lord (Yahweh) who often makes His intention known in dreams. This Joseph, like his famous namesake, is a dreamer of dreams. And he remained in Egypt until the Son of God was called out of Egypt.
The Apostles believed that the return of Jesus from Egypt fulfills the prophesy of Hosea 11:1: "I called my son out of Egypt." Jews insist that this refers to Israel as a people, and certainly that is the context of the Hosea passage. Matthew's Gospel says: So Joseph got up and, taking the child and his mother with him, left that night for Egypt, where he stayed until Herod was dead. This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: "I called my son out of Egypt." (Matthew 2:15)
All of Holy Scripture points us to the Promised Son who restores the divine image and opens the way to Paradise. May you embrace this great miracle during these twelve days of Christmas. I wish you a blessed Nativity with family and friends. And for those who are alone this Christmas, may God send angels to abide with you.
Related reading: The Nazareth-Egypt Connection; Egypt in the Book of Genesis; The Virgin Birth and Manger Too!; Christians Are Christmas People
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
A Christmas Message from Genesis
The Lord God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done this…you will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will crush your head, and you will strike His heel.’ - Genesis 3:14-15
What does it mean to eat dust all the days of one’s life? It means that one’s efforts, one’s greatest achievements are futile. To crawl on one’s belly and to eat dust are images of total defeat! This is God’s verdict on the powers of evil. They may at times seem to be winning, but all their efforts gain them no ground, no advantage.
Wrapped into this verdict is the kernal of the Gospel that the Woman (not Eve in Gen. 3:15) would bring forth a Son who will crush the Evil One and his host of demons. The promise is sure!
The heavens themselves are set against the Devil's rebellion. Our Lord beheld Satan cast from heaven! And the sun, moon and stars bow to the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords. The constellations echo the Angelic refrain: "Fear not! For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." (Luke 2:11)
Jupiter, called the King Planet, and Regulus, called the King Star, performed a celestial dance to proclaim the arrival of the Son of God. Christ was not born in Jerusalem, a ancient Jebusite holding. He was born in Bethlehem of Judea, an ancient settlement belonging to Abraham's Horite people. I Chronicles 4:4 lists Hur (Hor) as the "father of Bethlehem". The author of I Chronicles knew that Bethlehem was originally a Horite settlement, less than 10 miles from Mt. Hor. So Jesus's descent from David can be traced back to Abraham and the expectation of the Horites that a Son of God would be born from their bloodline.
The ancient prediction in Genesis 49 tells us that He would come from Judah:
You are a lion's cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness-- who dares to rouse him? 10 The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.
This clarifies the connection between Jupiter's regal behavior and the tribe of Judah because the starry coronation—the triple conjunction—occurred within the constellation of the Lion, Judah's totem. (Read more here.)
In 2 days, Christians will again celebrate the birth of the Son of God, the only hope of the world. He came to shed His Blood for the life of the world. At His second coming, He will bring that Kingdom of Peace for which our hearts yearn. Until that day, the battle rages between Christ’s seed and the seed of the Evil One.
Many who are in Christ are suffering greatly. Christians are paying a great price to bear witness to the Son of God in places where it can cost one's life. The cruelest human rights violations these days are directed against minority Christians around the world. Let us pray for them even as we celebrate the Nativity Feast, rejoicing that the blood of the saints is precious to the Lord and King who is able to crush evil once and for all, and to restore communion with the Father.
Have a blessed Christmas, dear readers.
Related reading: Royal Babies; Horite Expectation and the Star of Bethlehem; Christians are Christmas People; The Celestial Dance Observed by the Magi
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Was Abraham an Idol Worshiper?
Alice C. Linsley
Abraham was known by the Hittites as a "prince of God among us" (Gen. 23:6). He is the ancestor of many peoples living in many parts of the ancient Near East. He is a descendant of the early Hebrew kingdom builders, such as NImrod (Gen. 10) who dispersed across the ancient world.
Abraham was not a pagan who converted to monotheism. He was a member of the Hebrew ruler-priest caste which believed in God Father and God Son. The text is clear that Abraham worshiped according to the beliefs of his Horite Hebrew ancestors. The oldest known site of Horite Hebrew worship was Nekhen on the Nile (4000 BC). The idea that Abraha was a idol worshiper comes from a late source in the Book of Joshua. In olden times, your forefathers – Terah, father of Abraham and father of Nahor – lived beyond the Euphrates and worshiped other gods. (Jos. 24:2)
HR also refers to the Son of God who the Greeks called Horus. His Horus name suggests that Nahor was a Horite Hebrew. A prayer addressed to Horus says, "For you are he who oversees the gods, there is no god who oversees you!" (Ancient Pyramid Texts, Utterance 573)
It is incorrect to apply the term “pagan” to Abraham since the term comes from ancient Rome, a much later period of history. The Online Etymological Dictionary explains that "pagan," from classical Latin means "villager, rustic, civilian," from pagus "rural district." The term "pagan" refers to a peasant and expresses a class hierarchy in which common country folk were regarded by the urban elite as being of low birth, having rude manners, and lacking sophistication. This term cannot be applied to the ruler Abraham who maintained an army of at least 300 trained warriors, controlled a substantial holding between Hebron and Beersheba, negotiated water treaties with rulers, had a personal audience with Pharoah, and maintained two wives and two concubines in separate households.
Other than the Joshua 24 statement, which has another explanation, there is not a shred of evidence that Abraham or his ancestors were idolaters. Abraham's calling does not constitute a turning away from the tradition of his Hebrew forefathers (his Horim). He was a sent-away son to whom God delivered a territory of his own.
This peculiar verse: “In olden times, your forefathers – Terah, father of Abraham and father of Nahor – lived beyond the Euphrates and worshiped other gods” must be understood in the context of the Deuteronomist account, which begins in Deuteronomy and ends in 2 Kings. These books share a common concern with idolatry and recognize that on that side of the Euphrates, people worshiped the moon as equal to the sun. This is historically accurate. The moon god was honored in Ur and Haran, but never among the early Hebrew who regarded the moon as the lesser light. The Hebrew recognition of the sun's superiority is expressed in Genesis 1:16: "God made the two great lights: the greater to rule the day, the lesser light to rule the night."
In the tradition of the Horite and Sethite Hebrew the sun and the moon were viewed as a binary set, and the Sun was regarded as the greater of the two lights. In binary thought (versus dualism), one entity in the set is understood to be superior through observation to the other entity in the set. In dualism, the sun and the moon are equals so both are worthy of veneration. In the binary view, the sun is the greater celestial light and to venerate the lesser light is idol worship. This may be what stands behind the Joshua 24 criticism of Terah's residing in Mesopotamia where the Moon was venerated. Note, however, this is not a criticism of Abraham.
There is no other verse in the Bible to support the view that Terah, a Hebrew ruler-priest, worshiped a Moon god or goddess contrary to the practice of his Hebrew ancestors who regarded the Sun as the emblem of the Creator. Abraham's ancestors believed that divine appointment came by being "overshadowed." They anticipated that this is how the son of God would be conceived, as the Angel Gabriel explained to the Virgin Mary (Luke 1:35).
Genesis tells us about Abraham's Hebrew priest caste and the promise that the Creator made to their ancestors in Eden that a woman of their people would bring forth the Seed of God (Gen. 3:15).
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Who was Oholibamah?
Alice C. Linsley
Oholibamah's mother was the female clan chief, Anah. Her father's identity is not known. It appears that the authority was vested with the mother in this case. That would mean that Oholibamah required permission from her mother's household to marry Esau the Younger, the son of Isaac and Rebecca.
We find a similar pattern with Rebecca. Rebecca ran to her mother's household for permission to marry Isaac (Gen. 24:28).
Esau the Younger is named after his maternal grandfather, following the custom of the cousin bride's naming prerogative. Looking at the diagram above, we must imagine daughters born to Esau by his two wives Basemath and Adah, daughters of the great Hittite ruler Elon. One of these daughters married Isaac and named their first born son "Esau" after her father. The identity of this daughter is a riddle that remains to be solved, but that daughter appears to be Rebecca.
It appears then that Rebecca's royal mother from whom she sought permission to marry Isaac was Basemath. Basemath is a royal name that means perfume. It is the Hittite version of the name Keturah which also means perfume. Keturah was Abraham's cousin wife.
The cousin bride's naming prerogative is also seen in the kinship of the family of Moses. Amram had two wives: Ishar and Jocheded. Ishar is identified as the cousin wife because she named her first born son Korah, after her father.
׀
Esau ∆ = O Oholibamah (Gen. 36)
׀
Korah ∆ ∆ Moses
Here we again encounter Oholibamah. She is the only woman in Genesis whose mother, Anah, is figured in the line of descent in place of the father. Anah was the daughter of Zibeon. Genesis 36:24 tells us that Zibeon had a son named Aiah. Yet it is Anah, his daughter, who takes center stage as the mother of Oholibamah. Aiah is mentioned only once inn the Bible, but Anah and Oholibamah are mentioned repeatedly.
We must look at the location of Isaac's first encounter with Rebecca. Abraham's servant fetched Rebecca from Paddan-Aram and brought her to Isaac in the region of Beersheba. This was the territory of the Ishmaelites. It appears that the Hebrew clans of Mesopotamia and the Hebrew clans of the Negev intermarried and someone assigned Basemath to the Ishmaelite Hebrew.
Korah the Elder is the maternal grandfather of Korah the Younger who opposed Moses in the wilderness. Korah the Younger is Amram's son by his cousin bride Ishar.
According to Genesis 36:18, Oholibamah's three sons became the chiefs of their clans. Someone of Oholibama's clan "found the hot springs in the desert, as he pastured the donkeys of his father Zibeon" (Genesis 36:24b).
Again we see that the cousin bride named her first-born son after her father. We first saw this in Genesis 5 with Naamah, Methusaleh’s cousin bride, who named her first-born son ‘Lamech’ after her father. We found it also with Keturah, Abraham's cousin bride, who named her first-born son Joktan after her father.
Genesis 36 poses difficulty because Anah is also listed as a ‘son’ of Zibeon (verse 24) and Oholibamah is listed as an Edomite chief (verse 41). "These were the names of the chiefs of Esau, in their tribes and places, in their countries and nations: Chief Timnah, Chief Alvah, Chief Jetheth, Chief Oholibamah, Chief Teman, Chief Mibzar, Chief Magdiel, and Chief Zaphoim." The term ‘son’ in reference to these two women means person through whom descendents are traced and 'chief' suggests that Oholibamah was the titular head, not necessarily the ruler.
Oholibamah is an enigma. She is mentioned repeatedly as an important woman of Edom, yet little is known of her. Her connection to the house of Korah is indisputable, and Korah's claim to the rights of primogenture were probably justified.
Oholibamah appears to prefigure the Virgin Mary. Her royal mother's name was Anah, a variant of Anna. The Virgin Mary, whose womb became the tabernacle of the Most High God, was the daughter of Anna. Oholibamah, an ancestor of David, is another type of the Woman in Genesis 3:15, but Genesis 3:15 finds fulfillment in Mary, the Mother of God.
There is a lovely Toparion appointed for this Sunday in the Orthodox Church. Here are the words:
Prepare, O Bethlehem, for Eden has been opened to all!
Adorn yourself, O Ephratha, for the tree of life blossoms forth from the Virgin in the cave!
Her womb is a spiritual paradise planted with Divine Fruit:
if we eat of it, we shall live forever and not die like Adam.
Christ comes to restore the image which He made in the beginning!
Related reading: Was Mary A Dedicated Royal Virgin?; The Mother's House and the Father's House; God's Word Never Fails; Mary's Priestly Lineage; The Social Structure of the Biblical Hebrew (Descent); The Social Structure of the Biblical Hebrew (Right to Rule)
Response to The Continuum, Part 2
Alice C. Linsley
Who was Abraham?
Fr. Robert Hart said “Abram was a pagan, a worshiper of idols, until God revealed Himself to him, and revealed His purpose through him. The text is clear that he had, until then, worshiped his father's gods.”
Abram swore by the “God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth” that he would not take booty after the defeat of Chedor-Laomer and his allies. He said, “…not a thread, not a sandal strap will I take of what is yours, for you to be able to say, ‘I made Abram rich” (Gen. 14:22). To swear using this formula in reference to himself as Abram, indicates that he was a righteous man, not a pagan.
Further, Abram’s first action after arriving in Canaan (his mother’s homeland) was to seek guidance from the Moreh[1] (teacher, seer, prophet) at the Oak at the “holy place at Shechem” (Gen.12:6). The next verse states: “The Canaanites were in the country at the time” so it is evident that this account is written well after Abraham lived there.
We also have these words: “Abram put his faith in Yahweh and this was reckoned to him as righteous” (Gen. 15:6). We note that here too he is still called ‘Abram.’ The idea that Abraham was an idoler worshiper comes from a midrash of the Common Era, centuries after the Pentateuch was written. It indicates that Abraham realised that his father's idols (Teraphim)[2] had no power and perceived that there is but one God.
Genesis is like the law tablets that were broken in two. To gain the big picture, one must put the two parts together. Seemingly contradictory things are said about Abraham, yet together these statements help us to understand who he was. For example, Abraham speaks of himself in Canaan as an alien living among the Hittites (Gen. 23:3), yet when addressing him, the Hittites speak of him as a “prince of God” among them. Of course, both are true of Abraham since he had not lived in that region from his childhood, but his mother’s Horite people were regarded as elect or chosen to serve God. They are the likely origin of the concept of a 'nation of priests.'
God also is spoken of in contradictory ways. In Psalm 104:2, we are told that Yahweh is robed in light, but in Psalm 18:11 we are told that He made darkness his covering. If we ignore one of these statements we gain a partial picture. We must look at details, some of which seem to contradict the dominate view. We must also discern patterns, such as these binary opposites, as they present to us how the ancient Semites thought.
Abraham was a Horite. The Horites were devotees of Horus, called “Son of God,” and they anticipated His coming from their bloodline. As bloodline was traced through the mother, the expectation was fulfilled in the Virgin Mary, daughter of a priestly line.[3]
It has been difficult to piece together the origins of our Messianic Faith because critical information is missing about the chiefs who were the contemporaries of Reu, Serug and Nahor (see here.) The information that is missing pertains to Abraham's mother's people who controlled a region between Mt. Hor (northeast of Kadesh-barnea) and Mt. Harun (near Petra). Genesis 10:30 tells us that these were the clans whose dwelling place extended from Mesha "all the way to Sephar, the eastern mountain range." They are called Horites (Egyptian Khar) in Genesis 14:6, and 36:20, and in Deuteronomy 2:12. Numbers 33:27-28 mentions 'Terah' as a place near Mount Harun (Mount of Aaron in Jordan).
Besides being the name of Abraham's father, Terah is also the name of an Arabian tribe (Terabin) that dwells chiefly between Gaza and Beersheba (Keturah's home). This information links Terah to Joktan and Sheba, from which Terah took his wife, Abraham's mother. It also suggests that Terah's mother was a daughter of a Horite chief named Terah and Terah's patrilineal cousin, since she named her first-born son Terah after her father according to the cousin bride's naming prerogative.
Poetreader made the comment: “Scripture is strikingly clear that Abraham was brought up to serve his father's polytheistic gods, and did indeed receive what he had from the true God by special revelation. That is the very heart of his story.”
Only one place in Scripture refers to Terah as an idol worshiper. Abraham is never referred to as an idol worshiper, so we should exercise suspicion here, since the weight of Scripture and extra-biblical evidence is against such a claim. Abraham left his father’s house as a response to God’s call, and THAT is the heart of the story. We are not told what he expected, but since Abraham and his ancestors were rulers, and since Nahor received Terah’s territory, it is likely that Abraham sought a kingdom of his own. To gain that kingdom, he needed a son. So, here we have the Gospel: By faith and obedience in this life we receive a Kingdom and it is the Kingdom of the Son of God. Isn’t this the heart of the Story?
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6
NOTES
1. "Torah" means that which is thrown by the hand of the Moreh (oracle or prophet). Abraham received guidance when he pitched his tent at the Oak of Moreh. The word "Torah" is usually rendered guidance or instruction, but the word is also associated with a prophet sitting under a tree. These treses were at the sacred center (See Eliade's research). Abraham pitched his tent at the “Oak of Moreh” between Ai and Bethel (Gen. 13). Likewise, Deborah who deliberated on behalf of Israel, judged from her tamar (date nut palm) between Ramah (meaning high or lifted up) and Bethel (meaning house of God).
2. Teraphim were ancestor statues, still commonly used among Africans, but the ancestors are not worshiped in the sense that is suggested about Terah and Abraham. The reverance shown to the ancestors of the ruler-priests is not unlike that shown by Christians to saints and martyrs to whom they turn for intercessions. There is a darker side to this however, observed in Africa today and experienced by St. Paul in Philippi (Acts 16:16-18), where demons are invoked and false prophets declare through demon possession.
3. Fr. Hart mistakenly assumes that Abraham's patriarchal people traced bloodline through the fathers. This overthrows the significance of the Virgin-birth of Christ. While social status, office and trade were received from the father, bloodline was traced through the mother. So Jesus was a carpenter, following Joseph's trade, yet the Son of God, not the son of Joseph.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Response to Comments at The Continuum
(This is the first of my responses to comments made at The Continuum, here.)
How are we best to understand the Gospel?
While the Gospel is universal, the context of Christianity is essentially Afro-Asiatic. To understand the Gospel in its fullness, we must understand the context of those to whom the promise of a Savior was made. These were Abraham’s people, some of whom held close to the promise and others who apparently did not; just as today we have believers and non-believers. Nothing has changed!
"Salvation is of the Jews” because the Jews preserved the record of Abraham’s people in the Hebrew Bible, and because the Son of God was made incarnate as a Jew, that is a man of Judah, according to the ancient prophecies.
What is the cultural context of Abraham’s People?
It is not Babylonian or Chaldean, although these are Afro-Asiatic languages. Since Abraham’s ancestors came out of west central Africa, the cultural context of Abraham’s people is essentially African. And Africa includes Egypt. The cultural context is clearly NOT Indo-European, since none of the languages or people groups listed in Genesis 10 are Indo-Europeans. All are in the Afro-Asiatic language family. Further, as someone has noted, Hebrew developed from the ancient Canaanite alphabet, which is also in the Afro-Asiatic family and closely related to old Egyptian.
Abraham's people weren't Jews. They were Horites and they were related by blood and marriage to other African groups such Sheba and Jebu (Jebusites).
Abraham and his ancestors were rulers in the Afro-Asiatic Dominion which stretched from west central Africa to the Indus River Valley. One of the traits of these rulers is that they maintained their own priests, and as Fr. Robert Hart points out, both ruler and priest were later called meshiach in Hebrew. Their unique kinship pattern insured that the Son of God would be born of their priestly lines. The lines of priests intermarried and the ruler-priests had 2 wives. (Remember that Elkaniah had 2 wives: Peninnah and Hannah.)
The ruler-priests were careful in marrying only the daughters of priests because they believed that the promised Son of God would be born of their bloodline and bloodline was traced through the mothers. In other words, they married that Meshiach might be born. He would be born a priest forever of the order of Melchizedek, Priest of Salem (also not Jewish). “Come thou redeemer of the earth, come testify thy Virgin-birth, all lands admire, all times applaud, such is the birth that fits a God."
What has this to do with the meaning of God's revelation to the Church?
The promise concerning the virgin birth wasn't an idea that the Apostles created, nor one they borrowed. It was a belief of Abraham’s Horite people. The Horites were devotees of Horus, who was called the “Son of God.’ The B’nai Israel and the Church are built on this belief which is traced back to before the time of Noah (over 12,000 years ago).
Expectation of the Son of God was spread by Horite priests (‘har wa’) across the Afro-Asiatic Dominion. They were the first missionaries. In anthropology, this is called ‘cultural diffusion.’ Here we find that from ancient times, the Promise was universal. The Promise establishes catholicity of the Faith and catholics uphold the universality of the Promise.
It is true that Christianity has had many different cultural contexts, in different historical periods, but as one interested in what Genesis has to say, the origins or etiology of the Gospel is what concerns me.
The promise of the Son of God preceded Abraham. He trusted God to leave his family in Haran because he was a man of faith. The promise of a kingdom and of a ‘Son’ was not a special revelation to Abraham. It was his received Tradition, and the same one we have received, only now more fully, as Christ has been made Man and is known to us as Jesus ben Joseph, born in Bethlehem (originally a Horite settlement).
Special Revelation of Received Tradition?
Traditional societies which revere the wisdom of the ancestors don't have the synthetic religions that we find in Western civilization: groups like the Mormons or Scientology which have fabricated histories and cobbled together seductive notions of reality. These groups seek to establish new familial traditions, claiming special revelation. They do not develop organically within the great religious traditions of the world and along the lines of family hertitage. Instead, they seem intent on shoving those aside or claiming equal authority with them.
If we go back far enough in time we find basically two religious traditions: one involving priests and the other involving shamans. While priests and shamans serve similar functions within their communities, they represent distinctly different, even opposite worldviews. Underlying shamanism is the belief that there are powerful spirits who cause imbalance and disharmony in the world. The shaman’s role is to determine which spirits are at work and to find ways to appease the spirits. This may or may not involve sacrifice of animals.
Underlying the priesthood is belief in a single supreme Spirit to whom humans must give an accounting, especially for the shedding of blood. In this view, one Great Spirit (God) holds the world in balance and it is human actions that cause disharmony. The vast assortment of ancient laws governing priestly ceremonies, sacrifices, and cleansing rituals clarifies the role of the priest as one who offers sacrifice according to sacred law. The law represents received tradition preserved through the priestly lines.
The catholicism of East and West can be traced to Father Abraham and his people, the ancestors of Christ our God. The Genesis genealogies speak of the ruler-priests who preserved and passed along a tradition concerning the appearing of the Son of God. Their blood flowed through the veins of Joachim and Ana, the parents of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.
The origins of the faith of the Son of God came to Abraham, not as special revelation, but as a tradition received from his forefathers. The distinctive traits of this tradition align remarkable well with the key features of catholic faith and practice.
Article VII is one of the best of the Articles of Religion found in the Book of Common Prayer, especially this part: “Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises.” Indeed.
The Continuum Dismayed
I hesitate to continue the conversation there as the piece posted comes from Louis Tarsitano’s widow and the discussion should focus on what Father Tarsitano has written. I regret that my comment took the thread off course.
I'll respond to the comments here at Just Genesis, for it is clear that those who have commented have not read my research.
Exams are almost over! I'll comment as soon as possible.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Good Commentaries on Genesis
A reader of Just Genesis has asked which books would be worth acquiring for his library. I have listed the commentaries on Genesis that have merit here. I've also reviewed numerous commentaries, including: Martin Luther's, John Calvin's, John Wesley's, Herman Gunkel, Leon Kass' and Patrick Reardon's.
Here is what the reader asks :
I'm now officially addicted to your web site! Have you written any books?
I'm working on my book - The Ancestors of God. However, I need time to finish it. I teach 8 classes a semester so you can imagine that time to write isn't something I have in abundance, especially this time of the year with final exams and final papers.
I'd like to ask you for some book recommendations (aside from the Bible!). I'm interested in all good history books relating to the Bible, from Genesis through the 3rd or 4th century AD, that you might recommend. I know there's probably not one single book that gives an in depth discussion of such a vast time - I'm slowly building a library, but I'd like to buy books with merit. What I've been finding are either very high level books that leave me with more questions than answers, fundamentalist books that teach a hyper-literal reading, or seemingly scholarly books that teach a biased history bent on tearing down the faith, not illuminating it.
What an accurate description on the available literature! I couldn't have written a better rationale for the material presented at this blog. It fills the gap. I hope a potential publisher is reading this! : )
Here is a list of books that I recommend as the 'first purchase' books to build a good library on Genesis. A more comprehensive list is here.
Creation and the Patriarchal Histories
Patrick Henry Reardon
Ben Lomond, California: Conciliar Press, 2008.
Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Vol. 1
Andrew Louth. ed.
Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2001.
Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Vol. 2
Mark Sheridan, ed.
Downer's Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2002
Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part 1 (Adam to Noah)
Umberto Cassuto
Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press, 1961.
Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part II (Noah to Abraham)
Umberto Cassuto
Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press, 1961.
(This volume includes a Fragment of Part III. Cassuto died before he was able to complete his Commentary on the Pentateuch.)
In the Beginning: The True Message of the Genesis Origin Stories
Lawrence R. Farley
The Legends of Genesis: The Biblical Saga and History
Hermann Gunkel; William Herbert Carruth
New York: Schocken Books, 1970.
The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate
John H. Walton
Downer's Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2009.
I hope this is helpful, and thanks for your support!
May your Nativity Feast be blessed.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Ancient Canaanite Inscriptions in Egypt
Sunday, December 6, 2009
David Plotz on Genesis One
David Plotz, writing for Slate Magazine, blogs on the Bible. His comments on Genesis are often hilarious. Here's a sample:

You'd think God would know exactly what He's doing, but He doesn't. He's a tinkerer. He tries something out—what if I move all the water around so dry land can appear? He checks it out. He sees "that it was good." Then He moves on to the next experiment—how about plants? Let's try plants.
This haphazardness may be why Creation seems so out of order. If God made light on the first day, what was giving the light, since the sun doesn't appear until the fourth day? And God tackles the major geological and astronomical features during the first two days—light, sky, water, earth. But Day 3 is a curious interruption—plant creation—that is followed by a return to massive universe-shaping projects on Day 4 with the sun, moon, and stars. The plant venture is a tangent—like putting a refrigerator into a house before you've put the roof on.
Does the Lord love insects best? They're so nice He made them twice: On Day 5 He makes "the living creatures of every kind that creep." Three verses, and 24 hours later, He makes "all kinds of creeping things of the earth."
"Creeping" is all over these last few verses of Creation. God tells His newly minted man and woman that they rule over world and its creatures, including, as the King James puts it—"every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." What a superb phrase! It's perfect for insects, terrorists, and children.
Now that's funny!
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Genesis One a Mistranslation?
It’s a few days now since we ran the story of Old Testament scholar Professor Ellen van Wolde claiming that the start of the book of Genesis was based on a mistranslation and God didn’t “create” the world, but (simply!) “spatially separated” Heaven and Earth.
The comment thread to that story has, depressingly and predictably, broadly divided between Creationists saying something like “God still made it all” and secularists going “Told you so – it’s all a fairy story”.
It has to be said that the good Professor didn’t really aid her case by adding some really breathtaking silliness by way of commentary. Try this:
“There was already water. There were sea monsters. God did create some things, but not the Heaven and Earth. The usual idea of creating-out-of-nothing, creatio ex nihilo, is a big misunderstanding….The traditional view of God the Creator is untenable now.”
Phew, thanks Prof. I think that’s cleared up the mystery of creation once and for all.
Actually, I think her etymological point about the translation is fascinating. She just shouldn’t have gone off on one, as though she had a seat at top table in The Restaurant at the End of the Universe.
Read it all here.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Faith of the Fathers is Our Faith Too!
There is considerable evidence for "the Afro-Asiatic Dominion" in which Abraham and his ancestors were rulers and priests. These rulers were regarded as semi-divine beings who exercised great power over their subjects and controlled the major water systems in their territories. Their priests were responsible for the diffusion of the Afro-Asiatic worldview and cosmology across a vast expanse from Bor-No (Land of Noah) near Lake Chad, to India and beyond. Anghor Wat was originally a Horite temple. Ankh-Hor means May Horus live! Wat means temple.
Abraham's people were Horites, a caste of ruler-priests who were devotees of the mythical Horus who was called the "Son of God," "Horus of the Two Crowns," and "Horus of the Two Horizons."
Horite does not designate a race or ethnicity. It designates a caste. The ancient world of the Afro-Asiatics was structured along caste lines. That said, the Horite worldview is distinctly Nilotic.
It is from the Horite priesthood that the priesthood of Israel developed. Moses' two brothers, Korah and Aaron, were both Horite priests before there was a nation known as Israel. Horite priests served in the temple in Jerusalem on a rotating schedule. I Chronicles 4:4 lists Hur (Hor) as the "father of Bethlehem". The author of Chronicles knew that Bethlehem was originally a Horite settlement in the heart of Horite territory.
The hard part of the research was finding evidence for the rule of Horite chiefs in the lands between Nok (Enoch) and Canaan and Haran. That piece of the puzzle has fallen in place with the discoveries of the ancestral tombs at el-Kirru in Sudan. The archaeological, linguistic and anthropological evidence connects the Kushite rulers with Abraham's Horite people.
What is the significance of this research?
First, it helps us to understand that Abraham and his people were rulers, not commoners. They were a noble people whose rulers preserved their royal bloodline through a unique pattern of intermarriage. I have shown that this pattern continues unbroken from the time of Cain and Seth (Gen. 4 and 5) to Jesus Christ.
Second, it also helps us understand that the Horite belief that a Son of God would come into the world dates to many thousands of years ago. The Bible is the testimony of people of faith, but not just any faith. It is the record of a people who lived in expectation of the appearing of a Son of God who would destroy the cosmic serpent and restore paradise. Their pattern of intermarriage remained unchanged because they believed that the Son of God would be born of their bloodline.
Third, the consistency of the kinship pattern of the Horite ruler-priests throughout the Bible reveals that the genealogical data is reliable for anthropological and historical research. Analysis of the kinship pattern of the priestly lines from Genesis 4-5 to Joseph, of the priestly line of Mattai, and Mary, daughter of the priest Joachim reveals traceable marriage pattern among the Horite ruelrs that is unique and consistent throughout the Bible. It shows that the priestly lines exclusively intermarried according to the pattern first found among Abraham's Kushite ancestors.
The kinship pattern of the rulers listed in the Genesis genealogies shows two lines of descent. One is traced through the cousin/niece bride who named her first-born son after her father. Example: Namaah, Lamech the Elder's daughter,(Gen. 4) married her patrilineal cousin Methuselah (Gen. 5) and named their first-born son Lamech. This pattern, which I call the "cousin bride's naming prerogative," is found with the names Joktan, Sheba and Esau, among others.
The other line of descent is traced through the first-born son of the half-sister bride, as Sarah was to Abraham. The ruler-priest lines of the two first-born sons intermarried, thus preserving the bloodline of those to whom God made the promise that a woman of their people would bring forth the Seed who would crush the serpent's head and restore Paradise.
This kinship pattern could not have been written back into the texts at a late date. It is the thread that weaves throughout the Bible, like the scarlet cord, from beginning to end.
Genesis is the account of Abraham's people whose worldview was essentially Nilotic since that is where his ancestors originated, as Genesis reveals. We should read the Bible as a trustworthy witness to the faith of the Afro-Asiatic (Aramaic) and Afro-Arabian (Old Arabic/Dedanite) fathers from whom we received this Tradition.
Reading reading: God's Word Never Fails; The Christ in Nilotic Mythology; Who Were the Horites?; Missionary Horite Priests; When the Sahara Was Wet
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
God's African Ancestors
![]() |
Monument of Nehesi in Nubia/Kush. Kush was also called Ta-Nuhusi. |
Alice C. Linsley
Religious belief is conditioned by the faith tradition which we receive from our parents, grandparents and, if we are to believe Jung’s theory of the collective consciousness, from our ancient ancestors. The Bible articulates this notion in this phrase: “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” And the expectation of the coming Christ was preserved through a long line of priests who were kin to Abraham, the "father of faith."
In as much as Jesus Christ was God in the flesh and He was born of a long line of ruler-priests whose point of origin was Africa, we may speak of Him as having African ancestors.
The ancestry of Jesus Christ our God is not a matter of private revelation. His coming was foretold from the beginning of time. Those to whom God declared that He should be born of their bloodline, lived in expectation of His coming for many millennia. His appearance on earth was announced by the unique conjunction of the king planet (Jupiter) and the king star (Regulus). Indeed all of the created order speaks of the God-Man Jesus Christ, so we should not be surprised when we find signs pointing to Christ in God’s handiwork. St. Paul recognized that all creation makes God’s nature known to us so that all are without excuse when they deny or ignore Him.
An anthropological study of the ancestors of Christ our God reveals that great attention has been paid to the matter of His coming. Most people have not attempted to deny or ignore Him. Almost universally, people have yearned for the benefits of His Incarnation and his shed blood.
It is fitting that attention should be paid to Christ's ancestors and to the evidence that His ancestors included Africans. It is interesting how consistently Africa is ignored when investigating the etiology of biblical practices such as circumcision and the linguistic connections between biblical words and the African languages.
Consider the names Nim and Lot, both Egyptian names, yet neither has been identified as such by biblical scholars. Rulers in Egypt with the name Lot include Iuwelot, Nimlot and Takelot. Egypt is the origin of the biblical names Nim-rod and Lot. Nimlot C was the High Priest of Amun at Thebes during the latter part of the reign of his father Osorkon II. He died before the end of his father's reign since his son Takelot F (king Takelot II) succeeded him as High Priest of Amun towards the end of Osorkon II's reign. This secession is established from the reliefs of Temple J at Karnak which depicts Takelot F as the priest-dedicant at a ceremony and mentions the ruling pharaoh as Osorkon II. Temple J has been dated to the final years of Osorkon II's reign in Tanis (which ended in 837 BC).
The Egyptian word nakh means "the powerful." Ha-Noch, the name of Reuben's first-born son is more a title than a proper name. It should be rendered something like "the Chief." Likewise, the Egyptian anoch can be rendered both Ha-Noch and Enoch. Nakh can also be rendered simply as Nok.
The biblical names Seth and Noah are equivalent to the Egyptian names Set and Nu and there are Egyptian stories in which the principal characters have these names.
Jesus Christ's ancestors were Afro-Asiatics. They spoke Afro-Asiatic languages which include Akkadian, Amharic, ancient Egyptian, Arabic, Aramaic, Assyrian, Babylonian, Berber, Chadic, Ethiopic, Hahm, Hausa, Hebrew, Kushitic, Meroitic, Omotic, Phoenician, and Ugaritic. Twelve of these language groups are spoken by populations in Africa. Christ our God spoke Aramaic, a language that shares many roots with the African languages Tigrina, Tigre, Amharic and the older Ge’ez.
Places associated with clans and rulers in Genesis are found only in Africa - Nok (Enoch), Kano (Cain), Ham, Bor' nu (Land of Noah), Terah, and the Jebu tribe (biblical Jebusites). Elephantine, at the border between Egypt and Sudan, was known to the ancient Egyptians as Yebu, the linguistic equivalent of Jebu. Some of these names appear also in Canaan: Terah, Jebu, Sheba, and Hor are among them. Jerusalem was a Jebusite city in the time of Abraham and Abraham paid tribute to that city’s ruler-priest, Melchizedek. Abraham’s Horite people apparently had kin-based alliances with the Jebusites. Both Horites and Jebusites were closely allied with the ancient Egyptians. Abdi-hepa ruled Jerusalem three centuries before its conquest by David. His name is Egyptian. (Hepa, Hap, or Hapi was a predynastic name for the Nile.) The first mention of Jerusalem, not surprisingly, is found in ancient Egyptian texts.
We also have the evidence of the four rivers mentioned as being at the heart of the Afro-Asiatic Dominion: the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Pishon and the Gihon. The last two are in Africa. Clearly there are two distinct traditions concerning the location of the garden, one African and the other Asiatic. The view that Eden was at the western border of Iran is based on the location of the Tigris and Euphrates. Yet we are explicitly told in Genesis 2:10-14 that the Gihon flowed through all the land of Ethiopia and the Pishon "skirts the whole land of Havilah". Havilah was a son of Kush (Gen. 10:7) and the "Kushites" lived in the upper Nile region and Sudan. So two rivers are in Mesopotamia and represent the Asiatic tradition while the other two rivers are in Africa and represent the African tradition. Both traditions are preserved in Genesis, but obviously the garden can't have been in both places. So where was it? If we accept that God drove the man out of the garden toward the east and the garden was west of Noah's homeland near Lake Chad, we must consider Nigeria as the likely location of the garden. So, we may speculate that some of Christ's ancestors came out of Nigeria.
Institutions and practices that characterize Abraham’s people are also distinctively African. These include the practice of circumcision (both male and female). To understand the cultural context of male and female circumcision we must recognize that Africans assign firm structure to males and softness and fluidity to females. It is important that women be less like men and men less like women (one reason that homosex is abhorred in traditional African societies.) In Africa, a family's honor is vested in the conduct of its women. Femininity is stressed and Pharaonic circumcision is seen as an enhancement of the woman’s femininity, potential fertility and purity. Likewise male circumcision was seen as an enhancement of maleness, potency and purity. The complement to the circumcised male is a circumcised female. The practice of female circumcision is not specifically mentioned in the Bible, but that may be because the female aspect is often hidden.
The African view is different from the binary exhibit of Hinduism in which both the lingam (male organ) and the yoni (female organ) are displayed. In the African tradition, phallic pillars (show right) are never displayed with the female organ. The female organ is always covered or hid

The institution of priest is distinctively African also. Sheba-qo’s son Hori-makhet, was high priest in Thebes. Hori is related to the Egyptian word harwa (priest) and is the linguistic equivalent of Horus and Horite. (Horus represented the power of kingship.) The term Horite can't be taken anachronistically when speaking of Abraham's ancestors, who were devotees of Horus, who they regarded as the “Son of God.” In African caste systems priests are always in the higher caste. Among the Mande of western Africa the highest caste are called the Horon, although few in this caste are priests. Most are warriors, farmers, animal breeders and fishermen.
As is evident today in traditional African religion, there are orders of priests, each assigned specific duties at the shrines. The Khar (Egyptian word for Horite) order of priests was responsible for providing fuel for the burnt offerings/sacrifices. Joseph's family lived in Nazareth which was the home of the eighteenth division of priests, that of Happizzez (1 Chronicles 24:15). The idea that only the Levites were priests simply isn't supported by the evidence of Scripture.
Rulers married the daughters of priests who served them. Joseph, Jacob's first-born son by Rachel, married Asenath, daughter of a priest of the Egyptian shrine at Heliopolis. Likewise, Moses married the daughter of a priest of Midian and his second wife was likely the daughter of a Kushite priest. Kush was known by many names, including Ta-Kash, Ta-Seti, Ta-Nuhusi and Ta-Kensat. In 747 B.C., a ruler named Kash united Lower Nubia as far as the Egyptian border at Aswan.
There were twenty-four priestly divisions after the construction of the Second Temple. Nineteen of these divisions are listed in Nehemiah 12:10-22. In the Nehemiah list we find these names of particular interest: Joachim, Joseph, and Mattenai. These are the names of priests who married the daughters of priests and from these lines came John the Baptist, Joseph, Mary and Jesus, the Incarnate Son of God.
Joachim is the name of Mary’s father, which is one reason that scholars believe that Mary was the virgin daughter of a priest. Hippolytus writing in the early third century, records that Mary’s mother was a daughter of a priest named Matthan. This means that Mary was of a priestly line. According to the custom of her noble African ancestors, Mary married into a priestly line when she became Joseph’s wife. According to Matthew 1:16, Joseph was the grandson of the priest Mattenai (sometimes spelled Mattai, Mattan or Matthew).
In the Masoretic Text the name of Samuel's city is hara-matatyim zophim. (See The Anchor Bible Commentary on I Samuel by P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., p. 51.) Zuph was a Horite priest of the line of Matthew/Mattai/Mattan. Hara-matatyim is the same priestly line as that of Joseph of Hara-mathea, one of Jesus' relatives and the member of the Sanhedrin who requested the Lord's body in order to bury Him.
Related reading: Recovering the African Background of Genesis; Abraham's Ainu Ancestors; Terah's Nubian Ancestors; Samuel's Horite Family; Abraham's Saharan Ancestry; Is Nehesi the Same Name as Nahor?; Tomb of Nubian Priest Found
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Genesis Through the Lens of Anthropology
Biblical anthropology, like Biblical archaeology, uses the Bible as a source of data. Significant anthropological information helps me to form a hypothesis which can be tested by checking the findings of related disciplines like linguistics, climate studies, migration studies, comparative mythologies, DNA studies, etc. There is nothing extraordinary about this venture, except that it requires reading the Bible differently than would a preacher or a theologian.
Much of what I write in this field is not well received by preachers and theologians who generally conceive of Christianity as being established by Jesus (as Islam was established by Mohammed). They recognize that Jesus and his original followers were Jewish, but they are astonished and often angry when faced with anthropological evidence indicating that Jesus represents a very ancient religious tradition which held the key features of Christianity long before Jesus was born. As I have argued, Christianity is an organic religion, the origins of which are found before Abraham's time among his Horim, that is, his Horite ancestors.
To give an example of how differently an anthropologist reads the Bible, consider the “begats” of Genesis 4 and 5. Most readers of the Bible skip over this list of first-born sons because they find the names difficult and the information boring. An anthropologist, on the other hand, will look here for clues as to the kinship pattern of these rulers. This involves doing diagrams, which I execute following E.L. Schusky’s Manual for Kinship Analysis. Analysis of the Genesis King Lists has made it possible to describe the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the Horite rulers.
The Genesis genealogical information indicates that Abraham's ancestors came out of west central Africa. In fact, anthropological investigation of the themes of Genesis 1-3 reveals that the closest parallels are found among Abraham's Nilo-Saharan and Saharo-Nubian ancestors.
Verification of this comes from many related disciplines, but most recently from the archaeological studies of the ancient Sudanese rulers who became the black pharaohs of Egypt. These rulers' names have parallels in the Bible and their monuments and royal burial grounds are being studied rather extensively. Meroitic had an honorary suffix - qo - as in the names Sheba-qo and Shebit-qo. These are linguistically equivalent to the biblical name Sheba, an ancestor of Abraham and his cousin-wife Keturah. Sheba is one of the rulers listed in Genesis 10. He is a descendant of Ham and we know from the Genesis genealogical information that Ham's line intermarried with the descendants of Shem.
An anthropologist also pays attention to details such as sacred mountains and sacred trees and their locations. We note that the Oak of Moreh is called “the navel of the earth” in Judges 9:37. Moreh means oracle or prophet. Deborah is said to have ruled Israel from her palm half way “between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim.” This sheds light on the origins of the word Torah which means 'that which is thrown by the hand' of the Moreh. In Genesis 12:6, we read that upon his arrival in Canaan Abraham sought guidance from the oracle when he pitched his tent at the Oak of Moreh. The word "Torah", usually rendered guidance or instruction, is also associated with a prophet sitting under a tree.
An anthropologist is always seeking data. Without data there can be no hypotheses. Without hypotheses there can be no conclusions. My method is to begin with the Biblical text, trusting that it is reliable and truthful. Indeed, that is my working hypothesis. In 1953, Richard Rudner published “The Scientist qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments,” in which he argued that since no hypothesis is ever completely verified, in accepting a hypothesis the scientist must make the decision that the evidence is sufficiently strong to warrant the acceptance of the hypothesis. The problem of induction which David Hume framed so precisely is really a problem of decision about which action to take, not proof of the fallibility of science in general.
In Biblical Anthropology one must recognize when the evidence is and is not sufficient.
Maps are a valuable tool for Biblical anthropologists. Using maps, places can be identified that are associated with clans and rulers. Most of the names in Genesis do not turn up in Africa - Nok (Enoch), Kano (Cain), Ham, Bor'nu (Land of Noah), and the Jebu tribe (biblical Jebusites). Elephantine, at the border between Egypt and Sudan, was known to the ancient Egyptians as Yebu, the linguistic equivalent of Jebu according to THE DIPLOMATISTS HANDBOOK FOR AFRICA by Count Charles Kinsky.
Biblical anthropologists use data in the Bible to construct a picture of the religious life and cosmology of Abraham’s people. There were orders of priests long before the Levitical priesthood. The khar (Egyptian word for Horite) order was responsible for providing the fuel used in burnt offerings. Priests were circumcised and clean shaven. There was great emphasis on their ritual purity which included bathing in cold water several times a day.
Horite rulers had two wives. Most were the daughters of priests. Rulers were attended by their personal priests. So Moses was attended by a priest at his right and at his left when he oversaw the battle with the Amalekites. The priests were Aaron and Hur (named for Horus). It is likely that they were Moses’ half-brothers.
The genetic unity of Africans and the wide dispersal of peoples in the R1 and R1b haplogroups explains linguistics connections. For example, the word ‘Sakti’ = wine in Tantric use at the harvest moon celebration, is the linguistic equivalent of the Falasha word ‘Sarki’ = harvest moon festival. Sarki also means ruler among the people of Kano (Nigeria) who today are called the Kanuri (descendants of Kain). Sarki are also a people group who live in the Orissa Province of India. Sarki also live as ‘Haruwa’ in the Tarai region of Nepal. The word Haruwa is equivalent to the ancient Egyptian word ‘Harwa”, meaning priest.
Another word for priest is the Hebrew ‘Kohen’, equivalent to the Arabic ‘Khouri’ or ‘Kahin’ and the Persian ‘Kaahen’ or ‘Kaahenaat’ which is translated "timeless being". This word ‘Kahenat’ means priest in the Ethiopian Church. According to rabbinic tradition Moses had three brothers: Aaron, Hur and Korah. All three brothers were priests. Moses married a Kushite bride, not unusual for Egyptian rulers of that time.
The Hebrew ‘yasuah’ = salvation, corresponds to the Sanskrit words ‘asvah’, ‘asuah’ or ‘yasuah’ = salvation. The Hebrew root ‘thr’ = to be pure, corresponds to the Hausa/Hahm ‘toro’ = clean, and to the Tamil ‘tiru’ = holy. All are related to the proto-Dravidian ‘tor’ = blood.
Related reading: Biblical Anthropology is Science; What Does a Biblical Anthropologist Do?; The Bible and Anthropological Investigation; The Themes of Genesis 1-3; Genesis in Anthropological Perspective; The Marriage and Ascendancy Pattern of the Horite Rulers