Two-Year Anniversary!

This week marks the two-year anniversary of Just Genesis. To celebrate, I have reviewed readers’ comments and posted some of my favorites. The comments are grouped by topic.

On Adam and Eve
Jacob asked:
What happens to Paul's soteriology and Christology in, e.g., 1 Corinthians 15:20ff and Romans 5:12ff, if there was no literal original Adam (and Eve, if you want to also consider 1 Timothy 2:13-14 and 1 Corinthians 11:8ff)?

My response:
Adam and Eve aren't meant to be read as historical people in Genesis, but as the mythic parents. Analysis of Genesis 4 and 5 shows that Cain and Seth however are historical and married the daughters of a chief name Enoch (Nok) in west central Africa. So in Genesis 4 there are already human populations and tribal government. Whether all the peoples of the earth came from one original mother or whether there were multiple sets of original parents, doesn't change the fact that, from the beginning, humanity has been estranged from God and only God can bridge the gap. St. Paul insists that God has accomplished this in Christ, the one perfect Man and the eternal Son. Paul urges those who are baptized “to put on Christ.”

1 Corinthians 15:20ff and Romans 5:12ff don’t deal directly with soteriology, but with Paul’s platonic interpretive approach of Christology. The first man, Adam, is imperfect but the second Man, Jesus Christ, is perfect, the true Form of humanity. God made humans in God’s image and likeness, but sin marred that image so that the first created man is an imperfect type of the first uncreated Man. Paul is using Platonism to explain Jesus Christ to Corinthians and Romans who were familiar with this platonic approach. He wants them to see the pattern of revelation.

Roland wrote:
According to my friend James Kiefer, some scholars have reconstructed a pre-Biblical version of the Eden story in which the man and woman were to choose which of the two trees to eat from. God intended for them to choose the Tree of Life, but the serpent wanted immortality for himself, so he tricked our first parents into choosing the other tree. It was believed that snakes were immortal, and this story explained that "fact."In Genesis, this choice remains hidden until until Adam and Eve are expelled from the garden. Only then does it become apparent that in choosing the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they have forfeited access to the Tree of Life.

My Response:
St. John Chrysostom sees the sin of Adam and Eve as a trespass against the order of creation. Imagine a standing ladder. At the top of the ladder are humans, the crown of creation, the most complex of all living species and the fewest in number. Each descending rung of the ladder represents less complex species and at the bottom rung is plant life. Where is the serpent? Near the bottom. In obeying the creature over which God had given them dominion, Adam and Eve exchanged their God-bestowed dignity for subjection to the lowest of creatures. Why would they do this? Because we humans have a perverse tendency to betray our own natures. Read a portion of St. John's sermon on Adam and Eve's sin here.

In a real sense, every sin is a trespass against the order of creation and therefore an offense to the Creator. That is why we ask God to "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.

On the Extent of Noah's Flood
Anam Cara commented:

"The loss of life among the peoples living in region of Lake Chad was apparently great."

Ummmm...... Wouldn't that be TOTAL since only Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives were saved? Or do you think that the flood was only regional and did not cover the entire earth?

My response:
The story of the great flood is told from the perspective of those whose society was destroyed by it. Genesis uses Noah to speak about a new beginning for humanity (universal concept) while describing the destruction of a particular group. During the Guirian Wet Period both west central Africa and Mesopotamia flooded at the confluence of the major rivers: the Tigris-Euphrates region and the Niger-Lake Chad depression. Remember, the peoples living in both regions were Afro-Asiatics and their ruling houses intermarried. So we shouldn't be surprised that there are 2 Noah accounts in the Bible (one with a dove and one with a raven). One represents the Western African tradition (many doves in Africa, but no ravens) and the other the Eastern Mesopotamian Tradition. In Africa, the hero is Nu (Noah) and in Mesopotamia, the hero is Ziusudra. However, there is only one place on the surface of the earth that claims to be Noah's homeland, "Bor-nu" in the area of Lake Chad. In Turkey all wet lands are refered to as "Bernu", showing that the Noah legend was accepted as true of the experience of people living there also.

Linda wrote:
Hmm. An important difference in the creation stories is that of the Christian belief that God created everything from nothing. Only Genesis relays this idea.

Also, if Adam and Eve are archetypes and not persons, what is your understanding of the fall and original sin? How did we get from "very good" to sinful down to our toenails?

Also, how do you view the river names in Genesis - Pishon, Gihon and Tigris - do these correspond to an area in Africa? Are they not to be regarded as historical? Is the modern Tigris in the middle east named for the one in Eden? It may be that Adam and Eve and their story are symbolic but I remain undecided. You have clearly been working on this for some time and your posts are very thought provoking. Good work!

My response:
A terrific comment, Linda! Africans do believe that God created ex nihilo.

The Adam and Eve story perfectly describes our sinful, rebellious and fearful condition. That they chose from the Tree of knowledge rather than from the Tree of Life tells the whole story. The Church Fathers teach that the Tree of Life at the center of the garden is the Cross and all humanity tries to avoid that Tree, though it is our Life.

There are two flood accounts, representing the western and the eastern Afro-Asiatic traditions. Of the 4 rivers named, 2 are in Mesopotamia and 2 are in Africa. In Genesis 2:10-14 we are told that the Gihon flowed through all the land of Ethiopia. Ethiopians identify the Gihon with the Abay River, which encircles the former African kingdom of Gojjam. The Pishon is also in Africa because it "skirts the whole land of Havilah" (Gen, 2:11). Havilah is a son of Cush (Gen. 10:7) and the "Cushites" lived in the upper Nile region. So two rivers are in Mesopotamia and represent the eastern Afro-Asiatic tradition while the other two rivers are in Africa and represent the western Afro-Asiatic tradition.

On the Kinship Pattern of Chiefs among Abraham's People
A Religion 301 student asked:
If only chiefs had 2 wives and status was traced through the father, how did Cain and Seth establish their lines of chiefs (listed in Gen. 4 and Gen. 5)?

My response:
They established their lines through their wives, the daughters of Nok (Enoch). Status was received from one's father, but blood line was traced through the mothers, so the Gen. 4 and 5 information is about Cain's and Seth's wives and their noble father-in-law, who was probably a priest.

On the Cosmology of Abraham’s People
Arturo asked:
This is a fascinating essay, and I thank you for posting it. Could you elaborate a bit on the reversal of the priority of direction in this passage: "In pitching his tent where he did, the house of Ain (Bethel) has moved to the west, which means that south has moved to the position of north. We have a reversal of directional poles that places south in the position of priority. South presents marriage and reproduction. In the very next verse (Genesis 12:9) we are told that Abraham heads south, making his way stage by stage to the Negev.”

Why is there a reversal? Also, your citing of the Cabala brings to mind a question: have you posted on or do you intend to post on Pico della Mirandola's Heptaplus, being that it touches on the Book of Genesis?

My Response:
I'm presently reading Pico Della Mirandola's work On the Dignity of Man. His fascination with Cabala is evident. He, and other Renaissance thinkers seem to regard Cabala as equal to the Bible in antiquity and authority. I'm pursuing why this is so. I'd have to read his Heptaplus before I could write on him, but I hope to do so. Thanks for the suggestion.

The Afro-Asiatic cosmology is numerical (base 9) and spherical. Imagine a circle with the cardinal points North-South and East-West. These points are assigned number and gender symbolism as binary oppositions. North and East are dominant and associated with maleness. South and West are supplementary and associated with femaleness. The association of north/1 and east/2 with GOD is based on recognition of GOD’s sovereignty. Some of this mystical number symbolism is evident in the Ten Sefirot of Cabala. Imagine a circle with North as a point at the top center. This also represents high noon, a time of no shadows. This position of priority is assigned the number 1, symbolizing the Uncreated Hidden God (Ain Soph). Directly opposite is the point south, assigned the number 6. It is associated with mortality, marriage and fertility. When the positions of 1 and 6 are reversed it means that the fleshly principle is in motion: thus Abraham takes a wife and begins a family in Beersheba. By suggestion of this reversal, the text tells us what Abraham is about to do.

Now imagine an imaginary line running from north/1 to south/6, dissecting the circle. The east side of the circle is associated with dominance/ sovereignty/strength/judgment and is assigned the number 4. The west side of the circle is associated with reproduction, new beginnings, compassion and tenderness and is assigned the number 5. Here is where we see another reversal. The feminine virtues associated with west/5 are on the dominant (east) side and the masculine virtues associated with east/4 are on the supplementary (west) side. Reversals speak of the oneness of these supplementary opposites. Unlike Western metaphysics, which grants privilege to one side of an opposition and marginalizes the opposition (as Jacques Derrida noted), the Afro-Asiatic system maintains the male and female principles as inseparable and supplementary.

Jeremy asked:
"Among Abraham's people the Sun was the emblem of the Creator."

Can you clarify this? During the Feast of Tabernacles the people would renounce the Sun by turning away from it and turning toward the Temple. I like your assertion, but I'm not familiar with where to find it. This is certainly the Christian Tradition, but I understand it as originating with the Christianity and not with the Israelites / Jews. Perhaps by saying that it originated with "Abraham's people" you mean to say those who were children of Abraham, but not yet children of Israel? Thanks for the clarification help...nice post! Keep them coming!

My response:
Abraham's people" were Afro-Asiatics. Jews were not yet distinct from this large group. Abraham's mother was Canaanite and Sarah's mother was Aramean (modern Syria). You may want to read the posts on "Abraham's Canaanite Mother" and "Sarah's People". I'm speaking not of Abraham's descendents, but of his ancestors, some of whom were living in west central Africa.The temple was arranged so that the sun's path traversed it from East to West.

On William H. Willimon’s Lenten meditation on the Binding of Isaac

Fr. Timothy wrote:
Jacob Neusner, a secular Jew and Ivy League Professor, had the honesty to say something like, "For my ancestors, God was a personality, not an idea."Thanks for posting this great bit of gold from the treasury, Alice. We too often try to tame and control God by turning the lively personality in the Bible into an "idea" of our own.But as the great Gospel of the Incarnation reminds us, "The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." Those of us prone to darken wisdom with our too many and too tidy words need to take note. A very humbling message.

On Holy Tradition and the Priesthood
Father Greg wrote:
Anon wrote, "How you explain Mary Magdalene (the FIRST witness of the resurrection, and if that doesn't count for preeminence next to a swearing, sucking up, coward fisherman-Peter-then we better drop the subject..."

I think everyone here agrees that Mary M., Mary & Martha, most especially the Blessed Virgin Mary, and many other Biblical women are all greatly to be honored, and indeed have a "preeminance of honor." The question for you and the pro-WO folks is: How do you explain that Christ did not appoint any of these women, nor did the Spirit-filled Apostles consider any of these as Apostolic replacements, despite bestowing/knowing well their "preeminance" of honor?

Anon, you thus have proven your grasp of the fact that these women were the most "qualified" on human terms, but were nevertheless not to be numbered among the Twelve. Thank you for your clarity in this regard.

Even so, those against WO innovation today grant that women are often "preeminent" over men in people skills, leadership skills, intelligence, spirituality, etc., but still are not part of God's design for the priesthood. Perhaps I missed your argument why we should we start violating Tradition and Scripture at this point in history?

The Lines of Ham and Shem Intermarried

Alice C. Linsley

Analysis of the geneological information in Genesis 4 and 5 reveals that the lines of Cain and Seth intermarried. The lines of Ham and Shem also intermarried according to the same pattern. This is evident from analysis of the ancestry of Sheba the Elder and his grandson, Sheba the Younger.

At the top of the diagram, we see that Sheba, the Elder, Noah's descendent through Ham, had a daughter who married Joktan and named her first-born son Sheba after her father. This is typical of the patrilineal cousin brides among the Horite rulers of Abraham's people.

At the bottom of the diagram, we see that Joktan, Eber's son, married a daughter of Sheba the Elder. As Joktan's patrilineal cousin bride, she named their first-born son Sheba after her father. This pattern is found in Genesis 4 and 5 also. Namaah, Lamech's daughter, married her patrilineal parallel cousin Methuselah, and named their first-born son Lamech after her father.

Old Arabic script dating to 600 BC

CLICK on diagram to enlarge.

The clans of Sheba (Sabaea) are close relatives of the Jokanite clans of South Arabia. The territory of Sheba is referred to 24 times in the Hebrew Bible.  Beer-sheba, Keturah's home, was at the northern end of the territory of Sheba.

An inscription (shown) confirms trade between towns in Judah and Sheba. It dates to about 600 B.C. and is written in the distinctive South Arabian script by a messenger of the King of Sheba.

The kingdom of Sheba was also famous for breeding exellent horses (See Robert Morkot's The Black Pharaohs).

Related reading:  Who Were the Kushites?; Rabbi Hirsch on the Nations

The Daughters of Horite Priests

Alice C. Linsley


To understand the Bible we must look for patterns that first appear in Genesis. In this sense, Genesis is foundational to the whole of the Bible. The patterns are sometimes more evident when we focus on the women. This is true when considering blood lines among Abraham's Horite people because blood line was traced through the mother. Social status was according to the father's status, which is why all the first-born sons listed in the Genesis genealogies are rulers like their fathers.

In this essay, we will look at a pattern involving three wives whose lives present interesting common features. The women are Tamar, Asenath, and Zipporah. The evidence suggests that these women grew up around shrines where their fathers served as priests. They apparently did not live pampered lives, if we consider that Zipporah was drawing water for livestock when she first met Moses, her future husband. On the other hand, they held a high status compared to girls who might have been indentured to the shrine. All of them had two sons, the younger of which was tagged as a pointer to Messiah.

The fulfillment of messianic expectation is found in the story of Photini, the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well. She is the only woman who Jesus is said to have met at a well.  He revealed Himself to her and she believed.  She repented and became the first evangelist, bringing many to faith in Jesus Christ. According to tradition, she died a martyr's death, as did most of her children.  In a sense, Photini is the embodiment of the Church, the Bride of Christ.

Tamar, Who Builds Up the House of Jacob

Tamar was Judah’s daughter-in-law who bore him twin sons after he had intercourse with her at a Canaanite shrine. Possibly, this was the shrine of her "father's house" to which she was sent by Judah when he refused to provide her another of his sons.

Tamar's name means date nut palm, a symbol of fertility. Judah praised her as "more righteous” than himself in (Gen. 38:26) because she found a way to fulfill the levirate marriage law. The younger of Tamar's two sons was Perez, an ancestor of Jesus Christ.

According Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (Gen. 38:6), Tamar is a daughter of Shem who is also identified as Melchizedek. Since Shem-Melchizedek was a priest, Tamar's punishment as demanded by Judah was that set in Lev. 21:9 for a priest's daughter guilty of prostitution.


Asenath, Daughter of Potiphera, High Priest of Heliopolis

Asenath was Joseph’s Egyptian wife. She was a woman of high rank whose father was a Horite Priest of Heliopolis (City of the Sun). Her son Manasseh probably belongs to her father's house and Ephraim, the younger belonged to the house of Jacob, which explains why Jacob gave Ephraim the blessing of the first-born.

Asenath's father was Putiphar or Potiphera. This is a title composed of the word pu and tifra.  Putifra in ancient Egyptian means "this order." This may indicate the order of Horite ruler priests. The stela of Putiphar speaks of Putiphar as the "son of Horus, may He live forever."

Asenath's name means “holy to Anath”. Anath was a goddess throughout the Afro-Asiatic world. She is sometimes called Mari-Anath. She was believed to be the consort of the high God. Many shrines were built to her. These places had pools of water and were regarded as places where women could come to ask the Deity for children. These were also places of healing (compare to story in John 5).


Zipporah, Daughter of the Priest of Midian

Zipporah was Moses’ wife and a daughter of Jethro, Priest of Midian. Her name is derived from the word ציפור (tsipor, “bird”). Moses met Zipporah at a well, like a Midianite shrine. She bore Moses two sons: Gershom and Eliezer. The younger son was Eliezer. His Canaanite name means "God is my help”.

In all three cases, the younger sons were given priority over their older brothers. Tamar's son Perez is chosen over Zerah. Jesus Christ came from his line.

In Gen. 48, Jacob gives the blessing reserved for the firstborn to Asenath's younger son, Ephraim. Ephraim's descendents inhabited the principal settlements of Canaan, including Baal-shalisha which means the Three God or the God of Three.

In 1 Chronicles 23:17 we read this about Zipporah's youngest son: "The descendants of Eliezer: Rehabiah was the first. Eliezer had no other sons, but the sons of Rehabiah were very numerous.' Note that the name of Eliezer's first born son is a variant of the name Rehab. Rehab was another ancestor of Jesus Christ.


A Canaanite Shrine

The ancient mound of Tel Nahariyah is located in Israel south of the Lebanon border and north of the ancient maritime city of Akko. (Tel Akko is where an unusual sign of TNT has been found, showing an anchor.) The name Nahariyya means "River of God." Horite shrines were located a major water systems: rivers or an oasis or a well. This is why so many of the heros of Genesis and Exodus meet their brides at wells or river shrines.

The excavated remains of Tel Nahariyah have revealed it as an open-air Canaanite sanctuary. Like many such sites, it was established near a fresh-water spring. The shrine was founded about 2000 BC and was used as late as about 1250 BC.

Excavations have uncovered the remains of three buildings. The first was a small, square temple accompanied by a circular open-air stone altar. The other buildings were probably residences. Here there is a large standing stone. The third and most recent shrine building had auxiliary buildings and a smaller standing stone.

At the Nahariyah, archaeologists found evidence of offerings placed on the altar and oil oblations poured over the offerings. There was also considerable evidence that the sanctuary had been the location of sacrificial feasting (Pettey 1990: 179).

Excavators also found naked female figurines in silver and in bronze on the "high place" of the shrine, and in a pottery jar under the plaster pavement (Keel and Uehlinger 1998: 31; Negbi 1976: 64 and #1525-1534).

A mold was also found of a slim naked figure standing with her arms at her sides and hands framing her pubic area. She is small-breasted, and she has a protruding navel. Her hair flows about her shoulders. Her tall, conical hat has a horn sticking out on each side. No figurine produced from this mold has been found to date.

Although two of the cut-out metal figures from Tel Nahariyah wear short skirts, the others are naked. One of the skirted figures was worn as a pendant, as evidenced by a loop on the back of the figure's head. The figurines were probably made in workshops at the shrine suggesting a connection between priests and metal-workers. This sheds light on the metal-working activities surrounding Aaron after the Israelites had left Egypt.


Such Shrines are Still Found in Africa

The Canaanite shrine has a contemporary counterpart in parts of West Africa. Osofo Ahadzi, spokemen for Africania Mission (Ghana), explains that women consult deities at the water shrines in order to have children. These children are often pledged to the shrine or to the deity (as Hannah pledged Samuel to God in return for blessing her with a child). Ahadzi says that people who fail to redeem such pledges eventually lose those children.

People come to the shrines for other reasons as well. Ahadzi explains, “If there is a calamity befalling a family and they go back to the divinity or shrine and it is said that such a person should be trained in the shrine to learn the skills and acquire the power of divination to protect the family, that is when that person is devoted to the shrine."

The girls who are presented to serve at the shrines are usually young virgins. Sometimes their families are too poor to provide a marriage dowry. This is similar to the way that Catholic girls from poor families were sent to the convents during the Middle Ages.

Ofoso Ahadzi says that men may not marry a trokosi (indentured girl) without permission from the shrine. This is because the girls are also regarded as spirit wives of the deity. He said marrying a trokosi without going through the proper procedure will attract very severe punishment.

“There was a situation where the divinity asked one of the keepers not to marry this woman and he decided to go forward and marry. He thought that he was powerful and he went ahead and married. The mother died, he was going and the car had an accident. He died with his wife. In the traditional African religion the commandment is thou must not do this, if you do that you will get your punishment,” he said.

He says, “It is completely out of place for anybody to claim that the keeper of the shrine plays around with the girls. You can’t do that. When you go against any of the regulations, it is not human beings that will punish you. The deity will punish you because all the girls who go in there for training are the daughters and princesses of the divinity. So if you take liberties with them you will be punished,” he said.

Osofo Ahadzi said the girls have a good life at the shrine although they do not receive a formal Western education.

“I have a whole lot of problems about this so called formal school not because it does not promote development. But we are realizing that the formal education is actually foreign cultural mis-education. You see our people, they come out of the universities and they have no work to do. What we are being taught in the classroom is not what we need in our society. Look at our environment. You go to the villages and the villages are cleaner than the cities where the so-called intellectuals live. So the people who don’t go through our so called formal education are better off than those who go through the formal education,” he said.

Osofo Ahadzi said the girls are not taken advantage of even though they are used as free labour on the farms. He said the chores they perform can be likened to what students are made to do in boarding schools. And are the trokosi girls, some of whom are as young as two years allowed freedom of movement like students undergoing formal education? (Read more on trokosi shrines here.)


The Shrine Across the Afro-Asiatic Dominion

The sheltering of girls at shrine was common from Afric to India in the Afro-Asiatic Dominion. The Canaanite shrine has a counterpart in Hindu temples. In this tradition also abuse of girls is regarded as very serious. Dr. Shabhash C. Sharma writes, "Regarding the treatment of people (including the young girls and widows) in shelters, temples and orphanages, Hinduism is quite emphatic in its opposition to any abuse and exploitation at the hands of those in positions of power and authority: 'He, who betrays one who has sought refuge, will meet destruction. The very earth will not let the seed, that he sows, sprout.' The Mahabarata (1, p. 181).

Dr Sharma explains: "Sometimes even if the parents of a young girl or boy are alive, they might not be in a good socio-economic condition to take care of their kid and thus could decide to send her/him to live in a temple thinking that the temple would do a better job in raising their child. Thus the temple might be considered by some people an ideal place to raise their child where free room, board and education (in spirituality, arts, music, dancing etc.) are available, perhaps in return for a small or light physical (manual) service (work) to the temple. "

Widows also may attach themselves to the shrine or temple once their husabnds have died. This is likely what happened in the case of the Prophetess Anna (Luke 2:36-38) and happens in both west central Africa and in India (the western and eastern ends of the ancient Afro-Asiatic Dominion). Dr Sharma explains: "The same type of consideration, as indicated above for young girls, is generally applicable to adult women, especially the widows, when they decide to live in temples and religious places like Vrindavan. Note that even though the widows living in such places (temples etc.) might number in several thousand they still represent an extremely small minority relative to millions of Indian widows..."

Some believe that the Prophetess Anna is related to the priest Matthan who was the father of three daughters: Sobe (Salome's mother), Elizabeth (John the Baptist's mother) and Anne, the mother of Mary, the Theotokos. Anne is a version of the name Anath, who was sometimes called Mari-Anath.


The Christ in Nilotic Belief

Genesis tells us that Abraham's ancestors came from the Nile region (Kushites). In Nilotic belief, the Promised Son of God would be miraculously conceived by a daughter of the ruler-priests (Horites). That is why the daughters of ruler-priests were married only to ruler-priests.  So it is that the lines of Cain and Seth intermarried exclusively, as did the lines of Ham and Shem, and Abraham and Nahor.

Allusion to this practice has been found in ancient texts. In Amarna letter EA 4, Amenhotep III is quoted by the Babylonian king Kadashman-Enlil I as firmly rejecting his request to marry one of Amenhotep's daughters: "From time immemorial, no daughter of the king of Egypt is given to anyone.”

Amenhotep III's refusal to allow one of his daughters to marry the Babylonian monarch was motivated, not only by political concern to preserve Egyptian sovereignty, but also because marriage to the ruler's daughter was reserved for ruler-priests.


Related reading:  Wells and Brides; Potiphar, Son of Horus; A Woman at a Well; The Afro-Asiatic Dominion; Who Were the Horites?; Mount Mary and the Origins of Life; Mary's Priestly Lineage; The Christ in Nilotic Mythology

Jesus Christ in Genesis

To appreciate the biblical narrative one must look for patterns. One of those patterns involves two sons and another involves three sons. Two sons poses the theme of conflict and competition between brothers. The conflict sometimes ends badly as when Cain kills Abel, but often God’s power to restore broken relationships and to heal family wounds is shown.

Another pattern involves three sons and speaks of these as a tribal unity. The three sons of Noah, while not the progenitors of the human race, symbolize the unity of humanity, as Rabbi Hirsch shows in his commentary on Gen. 9:25-27.

Usually one of the three sons is less well known or even hidden in the text. This is the case with the three brothers Magog, Og and Gog. We have to hunt to find Og, but the third brother is in the text. Other tribal units include Huz, Uz and Buz.

When we consider the pattern of three as a unity, we of course thinnk of the Holy Trinity. This great mystery bids us to discover the Son who is also unveiled to those who seek Him.

The pattern of two sons
Two sons are often found to be in conflict. The conflict sometimes results in murder, as when Cain killed Abel, or in a threat of murder, as when Esau threatened Jacob’s life after Jacob stole his birthright. Sometimes God justifies one son over the other, as in the case of the conflict between Moses and his half-brother Korah. Numbers 26:10 tells us that the earth opened and devoured Korah and his fellow conspirators. This is presumed to be an act of God.

The biblical narrative derives structure from the theme of two sons. Consider this partial list to grasp the scope of this theme:

Cain and Abel and Cain and Seth
Peleg and Joktan – Eber’s sons
Abraham and Nahor – Terah’s sons
Moab and Ammon – Lots sons
Ishmael and Isaac – Abraham’s sons
Jacob and Esau – Rebekah’s twin sons
Ephraim and Manessah – Joseph’s sons born in Egypt
Perez and Zerah – the twin sons of Judah and Tamar
Moses and Aaron – Amram’s sons
Eleazar and Gershom – Moses’ sons
Hophni and Phinehas – Eli’s sons
James and John
Andrew and Peter, and two parables involving two sons

While the conflict between brothers is a prominent theme, it would be a mistake to conclude that these were the only sons. We must remember that Nahor (Gen. 22:20-24), Abraham, and Jesse all had eight sons. The youngest of Jesse's sons was chosen to be King in Israel and David's rule would be preserved in Messiah's eternal reign.

The conflict between two sons illustrates God’s power to restore broken relationships. We remember that Jacob and Esau eventually made peace with each other. We remember that Joseph and his brother Benjamin were eventually reunited. The theme also lifts up for us how God is at work in different places at the same time.

The story of Judah and Tamar in Canaan and the story of the Joseph in Egypt is an example. Both narratives are about the loss and gain of two sons. Jacob lost Joseph and Benjamin to Egypt, but gained Perez and Zerah in Canaan. 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. We see God working salvation in more than one place.

Joseph would have been about 26 at the time that Judah’s oldest son married Tamar. This son died without issue and the next oldest was enlisted to marry Tamar according to the law of levirate marriage. The second son died when he refused to raise up sons for his dead brother and spilled his seed. Judah was reluctant to marry another son to Tamar so he sent her to her “father’s house” in Edom. Naomi sent her widowed daughters-in-law to their "mother's house". The distinction between houses is important to the story. Judah never intended that Tamar should remarry.

Judah, like his father Jacob, lost two sons. After the death of two sons, he gained two sons by Tamar. His rule was amplified through Perez, the ancestor of David and Messiah.

This 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 two 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.

In the binary framework of the Bible, reversals indicate that God is acting both here and there. The Judah-Tamar shows God working in two places: Egypt and Canaan. The Judah drama in Canaan parallels the Joseph drama in Egypt. This is alluded to in the mention of the women’s association with shrines. Joseph’s wife was the daughter of the priest of the shrine at On. Her name "Asenath" means "holy to Anath", the goddess-consort of the High God. Tamar presented herself to Judah at a shrine in Edom. Asenath is to Egypt what Tamar is to Edom. 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 two sons? We recognize that although only one son could inherit the territory of his father, God is not restricted by primogeniture. He blesses whom He chooses and his blessings extend in all directions. This is the story of Abraham, Terah’s youngest son. God forms an everlasting covenant with Abraham, telling him that all the peoples of the Earth will be blessed through him. This is the story of Jesse's youngest, to whom the throne of Israel is given as an everlasting kingdom.

The pattern of three sons
Having considered the biblical theme of two sons, we now turn to the equally important theme of three sons. The recurrence of three sons is less evident because this theme is under the surface. The number three represents unity so searching for the three first-born sons enables us to identify a tribal unity. To illustrate how we must hunt for the third son, let us consider the case of Og, the brother of Magog and Gog.

According to the prophet Ezekiel, Gog was chief of the sons of Japheth. The name Gog doesn’t appear in Genesis 10:2-4, but the Prophet recognized that Gog and Magog are associated. When encountering two linguistically related names it is necessary to look for a third related name because Genesis presents familial units of three. We find the third name in Numbers 21:33, so that we are able to speak of the familial confederation of Og, Magog and Gog, with Gog having prominence by the time of Ezekiel (593-571 B.C.).

We note the persistence of the pattern of 3 sons here:
Gen. 4 - Cain, Abel, Seth
Gen. 4 - Jubal, Jabal, Tubal
Gen. 7 - Ham, Shem, Japheth
Gen. 11 - Haran, Nahor, Abraham
Gen. 46 - Jimnah, Jishvah, Jishvi

To this we must add Abraham’s first-born sons: Ishmael (by Hagar), Isaac (Sarah) and Jokshan (by 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. However, it is not clear that Ishmael would have inherited Abraham's office as chief, 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 two wives in separate households. 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.

Does Genesis provide clues as to which of Abraham's three first-born sons was oldest? Yes. The clues point to the hidden son, who is Joktan, the first-born of Keturah. He is the veiled son. Even today Keturah's descendents live very much as Abraham did and have spread out across the Arabian Peninsula.

The clues involve Isaac's two wives. Rebecca was his cousin wife and his other wife was a half-sister who lived in Beersheba. This is where Abraham settled after his experience at Mt. Moriah (Gen. 22:19), which appears to have caused estrangement between him and Sarah. 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.

Just as Abraham needed two wives to establish himself in the land, so Isaac needed two wives to maintain the territory. We are now able to speculate that Isaac had three sons: Jacob and Esau by Rebecca, and a son by his wife in Beersheba. (Tradition gives her the name “Judith”.) Isaac’s two wives and three sons establish a connection between the Aramaic house of Terah and the Hamitic house of Sheba.Terah and Sheba are descendents of Eber’s sons Peleg and Joktan. Terah descends from Peleg and Sheba descends from Joktan. Now where have we heard that name “Joktan” before? This is the name of Abraham’s first-born son by Keturah. He is the hidden third son, and probably Abraham's first-born. We had to dig to find him.

Conclusion
By paying attention to the two sons and three sons motifs, we see a consistent theme of fraternal conflict. reconciliation, restoration and amplification. The fraternal conflict continues today between the Jews and Arabs, descendents of Abraham and brothers. God has power to reconcile them and He will eventually prevail in the Middle East, though evil men oppose Him.

Exploration of the theme of sons reveals that God is not bound by human custom in His chose of rulers. He chose Abraham’s, Terah’s youngest, to head the line that leads to Messiah. He chose David, Jesse’s youngest, to be the King from whom Messiah would come.

The pattern of the third son prompts us to look for the One who is veiled, Jesus the Christ. Three sons represent a tribal unity, just as the three Persons of the Trinity are one. Jesus Christ is the Son ‘hidden’ in the Father's bosom. He is revealed to those who seek Him.

Blood and Binary Distinctions

Alice C. Linsley


The Afro-Asiatic worldview of the Nilotic, Arabian and Mesopotamian peoples, as it is presented in Genesis, is framed by the binary distinctions or supplementary sets. These are universally observed in Nature and experienced on a most fundamental level of existence. These distinctions are evident in daily life, as in the observation that the Sun appears to rise in the East and to set in the West. They are observed in the distinction between male-female, hot-cold, night-day, and between Heaven-Earth. In fact, the ancient Afro-Asiatics associated maleness or the masculine principle with the Sun and femaleness or the feminine principle with the Moon.

This intuitive association extends to semen and milk. The Sun inseminates the Earth and the Moon stimulates female reproduction and lactation. Because the moon affects water, tides, and body fluids in a repeating cycle there is a natural association of the Moon with the periodicity of the menstrual cycle. Many ancient peoples associated pregnancy with the moon and in France menstruation is called “le moment de la lune”.

Primitive societies are much better at recognizing and respecting binary distinctions than moderns. They were more attuned to the patterns observed in nature and aligned their thinking with those patterns. Blood was a matter of anxiety for ancient Man. This is evident in the mythological material that comes to us from the ancient Afro-Arabians and Afro-Asiatics.  For example, the Hebrew words adam and adom relate to red clay from which the first man is said to have been made.  These words are related to the Hamitic/Hausa word odum, meaning red-brown, like to clay along the Nile when the rains wash red silt down from the Ethiopian highlands. This is the region of the world where Abraham's Kushite ancestors lived and the story of the creation of Adam comes to us from the Nilotic peoples.

These peoples made a distinction also between the blood work of men in killing and the blood work of women in birthing. The two bloods represent the binary opposites of life and death. The blood shed in war, hunting and animal sacrifice fell to warriors, hunters and priests. The blood shed in first intercourse, the monthly cycle and in childbirth fell to wives and midwives. The two bloods were never to mix or even to be present in the same space. Women didn’t participate in war, the hunt, and in ritual sacrifices, and they were isolated during menses. Likewise, men were not present at the circumcision of females or in the birthing hut.

The mixing of life-giving substances with the blood shed in killing was absolutely forbidden among the Afro-Asiatics. This is why the Israelites were commanded never to boil a young goat it its mother’s milk. It also places into context the Judeo-Christian teaching against abortion, which mixes birth blood with killing blood, thus perverting the binary distinction between male and female to a point of desecration.

It is also significant that among tribal peoples, brotherhood pacts are formed by the intentional mixing of bloods between two men, but never between male and female. The binary distinctions of male and female are maintained as part of the sacred tradition.

Early man had an intuitive anxiety about blood. We see this in the belief that the blood of Abel cries to God from the ground (Gen. 4:10). Anxiety about the shedding of blood is universal and very old. The Priesthood, verifiably one of the oldest known religious institutions, likely came into existence the first day that blood was shed and the individual and the community sought relief of blood anxiety and guilt.

As a point of fact, the first blood shed in the Bible was not the blood shed by Cain when he killed his brother Abel. It was the blood shed by the woman when she gave birth. This is significant because it places life-giving blood ahead of the blood shed in killing. The birth blood to which I refer here is not the birth of Cain, but the birth of Messiah promised to the woman immediately after the Fall. This is the first blood of Scripture, though not explicitly stated, and this Blood is always prevenient.

The second shedding of blood was when God made clothes of animal skins for Adam and Eve. Here we see the first sacrifice of animals for the benefit of humans. This places God at the center between the life-giving (promised) blood and the blood shed in Cain's killing of his brother.

The third shedding of blood was when Cain killed Abel. We note that between the two bloods (birthing and murder) God sacrifices an animal to provide for the needs of humanity. In this sense, God is the first Priest and that first animal is a symbol of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world.


Related reading:  God as Male Priest; Why Women Were Never Priests; Circumcision and Binary Distinctions; The Importance of Binary Distinctions; The Christ in Nilotic Mythology

The Pattern of Two Wives

Alice C. Linsley

Analysis of the king lists of Genesis 4, 5 and 11 reveals that the ruler-priests among Abraham's Horite people had two wives. This is explicit with Lamech, whose two wives are named in Genesis 4.  However, Lamech was not alone. Na'hor, Terah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their ruler-priests descendants had the same marriage pattern. Elkanah, is another example. He married Penninah and Hannah (1 Sam. 1:2). By Hannah, he became the father of the great prophet Samuel.

A reader has asked why the ruler-priests had two wives. That is an interesting question and there is more than one explanation.  For example, Abraham's ancestors were Kushites and it is customary in Africa for the chief to have more than one wife.  It is important to remember that the men listed in the Genesis genealogies are not common people but rulers for whom having a heir was extremely important.  Two wives increased the likelihood of having a male heir.

The men listed in the “begats” are all rulers. Therefore, we must be careful to identify the two-wife pattern with rulers, not with the common man. The ancients regarded the ruler as the Creator's representative and it was a sign of his blessedness that he should have many sons. Two wives helped to "build up the house" of the ruler and the bride's fatehr house as well. The first-born son of the half-sister wife would ascend to his father's throne, but the first-born son of the cousin bride ascended to the throne of his maternal grandfather.  Likely, this was part of the arrangement whereby the cousin bride was to marry.  In exchange for his bride, the son-in-law agreed that his first-born son would belong to the house of his wife's father.
Because of this pattern of two wives (one half-sister and the other a patrilineal cousin or niece), it is possible to trace the line of descent from Genesis 4 to Jesus, the Son of God.

Lamech’s wives were Adah and Zillah. They are the only wives named in the Genesis 4 and 5 genealogical material referred to as the “begats”.

The “begets” of Genesis present an extremely old kinship pattern. I have diagrammed and analyzed the pattern using E.L. Schusky’s Manual for Kinship Analysis, probably one of the most important books of the 20th century as it has provided a method for diagramming familial (consanguine) and contractual (fictive) relationships. Once a diagram is completed, the anthropologist is able to sit with that diagram and analyze the kinship to determine its pattern.

Kinship patterns are like cultural signatures. Each has unique traits. It is the uniqueness of the pattern that makes it possible to trace the origin of peoples and their relationship to other tribes. My analysis of the kinship pattern presented in Genesis 4 and 5 can direct us to the homeland of some of Abraham’s ancestors.

Although Abraham never lived in the reagion of the Upper Nile, some of his ancestors did. This is evident in the kinship pattern of Genesis 4 and 5, a pattern which is found only in west central Africa.

What does analysis of the Genesis genealogical information reveal about the ruler-priests of Abraham's people? Analysis of the pattern shows that Cain and Seth married the daughters of a great Afro-Asiatic chief named Nok (Enoch in Hebrew). These brides named their first-born sons after their father. So it is that Cain's firstborn son is Enoch and Seth's firstborn son is Enosh. The names Enosh and Enosh are linguistically equivalent and are derived from the Chadic name "Nok".

In Genesis 5:26 we find the same pattern. Lamech’s daughter, Naamah, married her patrilineal parallel cousin, Methuselah, (Gen. 5:26) and named their first-born son Lamech, after her father. We find the pattern in Abraham’s time also. His cousin-wife Keturah name their first-born son Joktan after her father. From Keturah come all the Joktanite tribes of Arabia.

Before a man could become chief in his father's place, he had to have two wives. This explains the urgency of Abraham’s mission in seeking a wife for his son Isaac after Ishmael’s departure. It also suggests that Isaac already had a wife in Beersheba. That wife would have been his half-sister, a daughter of Abraham by Keturah. This follows the pattern of Abraham’s father Terah and of his grandfather Nahor. My analysis of the Genesis 4 and 5 kinship pattern reveals that one wife is a half sister and the other a patrilineal parallel cousin. So we are not surprised that Rebekah is Isaac’s cousin bride.

The wives maintained separate households on a north-south axis. Their households marked the northern and southern boundaries of the chief’s territory. Sarah was Abraham’s sister bride who resided in Hebron and Keturah was Abraham’s cousin bride who resided to the South in Beersheba.

The wives were placed on a north-south axis rather than on an east-west axis because these chiefs, with the exception of Lamech the Elder, did not presume to set themselves up as God, whose emblem, the sun, moved from East to West. Lamech’s wives represent a departure from the tradition of his people. This is evident in their names. Adah is related to the word “dawn” and Zillah is related to the word “dusk”, suggesting that Lamech’s wives resided in separate households on an East-West axis, Lamech therefore claiming equality with God.

Today this kinship pattern is still identifiable among clans in Niger, Nigeria and in the grasslands of Cameroon. The metal working chiefs of the Inadan who live in the Air Desert surrounding Agadez, maintain 2 wives in separate households on a north-south axis (National Geographic, Aug. 1979, p. 389). There appears to be a connection then between the priesthood and metalwork (this suggested further by the story of Aaron who made an idol).

Other evidence to support the hypothesis that Abraham’s ancestors came from west central Africa is found in the place names Nok, Kano, Bornu and Adamah. Nok and Kano (Kain) are found in the Jos Plateau of Nigeria and are located on a north-south axis. Nok is the oldest site of metal working in Africa, verifying the claim that Tubal-Cain was a worker of metal.

Additionally, only one place on the surface of the earth is claimed by the locals to be the homeland of Noah and that is Bornu (“Land of Noah”) near Lake Chad in central Africa. The region of Adamah (place of red clay) is also found here.

There is further evidence in the discovery of a large walled city connected to the house of Sheba in a dense rain forest on the Atlantic coast of Nigeria. Sheba the Elder was an ancestor of Abraham, the grandson of Eber (Gen. 10:28). The House of Sheba was closely aligned with the House of Joktan and the Horites.


Related reading:  Who were the Horites?; Who Were the Kushites?

Circumcision and Binary Distinctions

Alice C. Linsley


How fair and how pleasant art thou, O love, for delights!
This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes.
I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof...
--Song of Solomon, Chapter 7:6-8


In November 1982, Anthropologist Janice Boddy's fascinating essay on Pharaonic circumcision appeared in American Ethnologist. The essay was titled "Womb as Oasis: The symbolic context of Pharaonic circumcision in rural Northern Sudan" (Vol.9, pgs. 682-698). Here Boddy sets forth her research on Pharaonic circumcision among the Sudanese.  Circumcision appears to have originated among the ancient Kushites. Sudan was part of ancient Kush and Abraham's ancestors came from this part of Africa.

In Pharaonic circumcision, the clitoris and labia minora are removed. Then the labia majora is sewn closed, leaving a small opening at the vulva for the release of urine and menstrual blood. Among the Sudanese this practice of female circumcision parallels the circumcision of males and emphasizes the binary distinction between females and males.

Boddy explains: "In this society women do not achieve social recognition by becoming like men, but by becoming less like men physically, sexually, and socially. Male as well as female circumcision rites stress this complementarity. Through their own operation, performed at roughly the same age as when girls are circumcised (between five and ten years), boys become less like women: while the female reproductive organs are covered, that of the male is uncovered. Circumcision, then, accomplishes the social definition of a child's sex by removing physical characteristics deemed appropriate to his or her opposite: the clitoris and other external genitalia, in the case of females, the prepuce of the penis, in the case of males" (Boddy, pg. 688).

The Afro-Asiatic worldview maintains binary opposites. The complementarity of the opposites is evident only when their distinctions are clear. So it is important that women become less like men and men less like women. The lingam (male organ) and yoni (female organ) of Hinduism represent the eastern expression of the Afro-Asiatic worldview. Both are displayed in Hinudism. However, in the western Afro-Asiatic tradition, phallic pillars such as the one shown at right are displayed, but the female organ is never shown. It covered or hidden. This fits the binary distinction between revealed and hidden found in Genesis. It also fits the Sudanese view of the complementarity of gender roles which assigns firm structure to males and softness and fluidity to females.


Gender Roles as Complementary

The Sudanese who practice Pharaonic circumcision believe that the fetus is formed from the union of a man's seeds with his wife's blood. Sexual intercourse causes the woman's blood to thicken or coagulate and she ceases menstruation until after the baby's birth. In their thinking, the child receives its bones from its father and its flesh and blood from its mother. This reflects their observation of the roles that males and females play in society. As Carol Gilligan also observed in her book In a Different Voice, males insist on rules and structure. It is from them that a society receives its rigidity (bones). It is through women that it receives fluidity and integration (its blood and flesh) (Boddy, pg. 692).

As the Sudanese believe that life is in the blood, it is especially important for the women of their society to conduct themselves as women. Boddy explains, “In Sudan, as elsewhere in the Muslim world, a family's dignity and honor are vested in the conduct of its womenfolk" (Boddy, pg. 686). 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. The complement to the circumcised male could only be a circumcised female.

Even today African men boast of their sexual strength and are careful about not spilling their seed. As Laura Bohannan discovered when she attempted to tell the story of Hamlet to a group of West African men, the chief is to have more than one wife so that his seed will "build up his house". He is grateful to the wife who bears him many children.

This also explains why barrenness is such a pitiable condition among the women of Genesis. Those unable to bear children were perceived as less than fully female. The woman's lack of fruit implies a deficiency of femaleness. Sarah's lament over not being able to have children was met by the divine promise that she would bring forth a son in her old age. This promise came after years of sorrow and humiliation, and though Sarah finally bore a son, she would not have seen herself as Abraham's perfect complement - not when his other cousin wife, Keturah, bore him 6 sons.

We understand something of Rachel's grief in not being as fruitful as her sister. Though she was clearly loved by Jacob, this was not sufficient to console her. It was Leah, the one less loved of Jacob, who proved most fruitful and therefore a perfect complement to Jacob.


Fertility and the Date Palm

Among Abraham's people, the traditional cure for sterility was to place a date from the date palm (tamar) in the vagina of the barren women. The date nut (below) and coconut (shown right) resemble the vagina and the womb. The date palm was known from the first Pharaonic dynasties and among Abraham's people was a symbol of fertility.

The oasis or well is the natural habitat of date palms and also the place where unmarried men could met unmarried women. Abraham met Keturah at the Well of Sheba (Beersheba) and Moses met his future wife at a well or oasis frequented by Midianites.

Female circumcision is practiced in rural areas of Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Somalia, Chad, Nigeria and Niger. According to a 2002 study done in Nigeria, female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity and circumcised females experience sexual arousal and orgasm as frequently as uncircumcised. However, circumcised females are more likely to find husbands of standing. Uncircumcised females are regarded as loose women, just as the Jews regarded the uncircumcised as unclean.

Here are some first-hand conversations that express the respect and gratitude felt toward circumcised mothers in Africa.

A Somali man said: “You had better treat your mother with more respect, boy! A circumcised woman! A woman whose womb has brought forth three sons into this family! That is a circumcised woman, my son, not some loose woman who can be treated as of little account. Without her, this family would have no one to pass along the name! Now you listen: you start giving her gifts, you cast your eyes down when she enters a room; do you hear me?”

A Sudanese man said: “Is this how you speak to your sister-in-law? Have you forgotten that she is circumcised? If this is how you treat circumcised women, then does your own family mean nothing to you?"


Related reading:  Circumcision Among Abraham's People; Binary Distinctions and Kenosis; Blood and Binary Distinctions; Binary Sets in the Ancient World

The Tree in the Middle of the Garden

Alice C. Linsley


The Church Fathers agree that Humans were created originally to enjoy perfect communion with God. That would be possible only without sin. So the first humans were innocent, but something happened to cause them to sin. What happened involved a serpent and a tree and humans making the wrong choice, which is called disobedience.

The Church Fathers don't agree on the question of original mortality. As the original humans were flesh, and therefore finite, they would experience death. If you follow this line of reasoning, St. Paul is speaking of spiritual death, not physical death, when he speaks of sin entering the world by Adam and by sin, death.

St. John Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.) held that the first humans were created midway between corruption and incorruption and were free to choose. It is like the story (Deut. 27:11-26) of the Israelites gathered in the valley between Mount Gerizim (of blessing) and the Mount Ebal (of cursing) and God telling them to "Choose life!"

The Fathers speak of the tree in the middle of the Garden as having both a material and geographical presence and as representing a state of being. Adam stretched out his hand and took of the fruit of that tree. Christ stretched out his arms on the Tree (Cross) and broke the curse of Adam. The Cross, like the tree in Paradise, had a material and geographical presence but is also a state of being. As Christians we take up the cross and in doing so we choose life.


Related reading:  Trees in Genesis

Survey of Women in Genesis

I recently completed a survey of women in Genesis for a class I'm teaching on Women in the Bible. I thought readers of Just Genesis might be interested in the survey so I'm posting it here.

Category 1: Women Named in Genesis

Eve (Gen. 3:20)
Adah and Zillah (Gen. 4:20) – Wives of Lamech
Naamah (Gen. 4:22) – Wife of Methuselah
Sarai (Gen. 11:29) – Half-sister and wife of Abraham
Milcah (Gen. 11:29) – Wife of Nahor
Iscah (Gen. 11:29) – Probable second wife of Nahor
Hagar (Gen. 16:1) – Sarah’s maid
Rebekah (Gen. 24:15) – Wife of Isaac
Keturah (Gen. 25:1) – Cousin and wife of Abraham
Mahalath (Gen. 28:9) – Wife of Esau
Rachel (Gen. 29:6) – Wife of Jacob
Leah (Gen. 29:16) – Wife of Jacob
Bilhah (Gen. 30:2) – Rachel’s maid
Zilpah (Gen. 30:9) – Leah’s maid
Dinah (Gen. 30:20) – Daughter of Jacob by Leah
Adah (Gen. 36:2) – Wife of Esau
Oholibamah (Gen. 36:2) – Wife of Esau
Basemath (Gen. 36:3) – Wife of Esau
Tamar (Gen. 38:6) – Daughter-in-law of Judah and mother of his twin sons
Asenath (Gen. 41:50) – Wife of Joseph, daughter of the Priest of On (Heliopolis)

Category 2: Named but Voiceless
These women are not remembered as having said anything:

Adah and Zillah
Naamah
Milcah and Iscah
Keturah
Mahalath
Bilhah and Zilpah
Dinah
Adah
Oholibamah
Basemath
Asenath

Category 3: Named and with a Voice

Eve
Sarah
Hagar
Rebekah
Rachel
Leah
Tamar

Category 4: Nameless and Voiceless

The wives of Cain and Seth; they were the daughters of a great chief named Nok
The wives of all the men listed in Gen. 4 and 5
The sisters of Jubal and Jabal (Gen. 4)
Noah's wife
The wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth
The wives of the descendents of Noah listed in Genesis 10
The mother of Abraham and Nahor
The mother of Haran and Sarah
Hagar's mother
Lot's wife and Lot's daughters
Keturah's mother
The wives of the 5 sons of Abraham by Keturah
Rebekah's mother
Rebekah's nurse
Tamar's mother
Asenath's mother