The Afro-Arabian Dedanites

The oldest mosques in Egypt and Baghdad were oriented to Dedan, not Mecca.

Alice C. Linsley

Islam claims that Mecca has always been the sacred center of that faith system. Yet the mosque build by Mohammad in Medina was aligned to Jerusalem. Later the alignment changed to Mecca.

The qiblahs in the oldest mosques in Cairo and in Baghdad point to Dedan, about 500 miles north-northwest of Mecca. This is also where the oldest Arabic scripts have been found. The script is sometimes called "Dedanite" after the location of the trove of archaic Arabic documents. The highest concentration of Old Arabic texts has been found in the region of Dedan (shown on the map on the right side of the Dead Sea across from the word Ham.)

Dedan was home to an industrious Afro-Arabian people who had close association with the Joktanite clans of Arabia and the peoples of Raamah, Sheba, Ophir, and Kush.

The Dedanites were famous as traders and caravan merchants. The regions where they did business were rich in gold, copper, onyx, and fragrant resins used for making incense and perfumes.

Isaiah 21:13 speaks of the "caravans of Dedanites" and Ezekiel 27:20 speaks of Dedan as supplying Tyre with precious things. They traded in spice, ivory, incense, and textiles with lands as distant as India, Cambodia and China. They probably also traded in horses which were bred in Sheba. They traded in copper from the 4000 B.C. mines in the Air region of Niger where there are rock drawings of chariots, evidence of early copper smelting, and copper weapons.

The Joktanite clans are related to the Dedanites and to Abraham's Horite Hebrew clans. Joktan is the name of Abraham's first born son by his cousin wife, Keturah. In Hebrew Keturah (qeṭûrâh) refers to incense. Keturah resided in Beersheba, at the southern boundary of Abraham's territory in Edom. This was a stop of the incense road that the Dedanites traveled.

Genesis 10:7 tell us that Dedan the Elder was a grandson of Kush by his son Raamah. Raamah was Nimrod's brother. Raamah settled in the region to the southeast of Dedan while Nimrod built a kingdom in the Tigris-Euphrates River Valley. Genesis reveals a kinship connection between the Afro-Arabian Dedanites and the Afro-Asiatic Arameans. The separation of the two groups in the time of Peleg and Joktan was territorial only, as the ruling lines continued to intermarry.

Dedan the Younger was the son of Abraham's first-born son Joktan (Gen. 25:3). Most Arabs are descended from Abraham through Joktan. He is remembered by Arabs as Yaqtan. Josephus knew him as Joctan and his name is preserved in the ancient town of Jectan near Mecca.

Related reading: The Gold of Ophir; Kushite Gold; Peleg: Time of Division; Biblical Sheba and East African Settlements Linked; Who Were the Kushites?; Afro-Asiatic Metal Workers; Was Keturah Abraham's Wife?

Righteous Job and His Hebrew Kin

Alice C. Linsley


The book of Job is difficult to classify. The person of Job is regarded as a prophet, but the book that bears his name is not like the other books of the Prophets. Possibly this is because the material is organized by someone from a much later time.

Job is often classified as a wisdom literature, but unlike other books of wisdom it involves direct debate or disputation among apparently historical figures. The debate probably dates to a later time than Job and his friends actually lived. The author ridicules Job's friends as people from the desolate wilderness who live in the clefts of the valleys and in the caves. They are portrayed as donkeys braying among the bushes (Job 30:3-7). This is not how Job himself would have regarded his kin. We can be fairly certain that the author of Job was not someone who lived in Arabia or even in that part of Canaan that was Horite Hebrew territory.

The first two chapters of Job provide a clue as to when the author lived. Here we find a picture of Satan as a "son of God" who has the power to accuse. This suggests an author from the Persian Period, writing long after the time that Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar and Elihu would have lived. Satan as the accuser was a favorite theme of that period.

Job reasons that God is not as his friends describe Him. In fact, a close reading of Job will dispel most notions of God, whether ancient or modern. God is not cruel like the pagan gods. God is not impersonal as conceived by the Deists. God is not deceived, as sinners hope. God is not blind to the suffering and death of the righteous. He recognized the blood of Abel which cried to Him from the ground and He knows of every tear and drop of blood shed by His righteous ones. Nor is God the Divine Arbitrator of karma as in Hinduism and Buddhism.

Yet Job never claims to know God's mind. For the righteous, suffering gives way to contemplating the "secret councils of God" (Job 15:8) and to prayer that we might not experience the second death of which Baruch 2:17 speaks: "The dead who are in the graves, whose souls [ka] are taken from their bodies, will give unto the Lord neither praise nor righteousness." Abraham's people believed that the soul and the body must stay joined after death to enjoy eternal life. This is Job's last hope. He proclaims that "I have a living Defender and that he will rise up last [as Job's final witness] on the dust of the earth. After my awakening, he will set me close to him, and from my flesh I shall look on God. He whom I shall see with take my part; my eyes will be gazing on no stranger." (Job 19:25-27 NJB) In Job 13:16, Job declares that his trust in God as his salvation (Yeshua - Jesus) will never be destroyed. Job comes to this in his suffering, but his friends are not suffering. For them this life is good and Job's suffering can only be explained has having lost God's favor. They said the same about Jesus in His passion.

Eliphaz was a descendant of Teman, one of Esau's sons (Gen. 36). The Temanites were known for their wisdom. Jeremiah 49 links the Temanites with the Dedanites. According to Genesis 10:7 and Genesis 25:3, Dedan was descended from Kush and from Abraham by his cousin wife, Keturah. Dedan's father was Abraham's first-born son Joktan. Dedan's brother was Sheba the Younger. Isaiah 21:13 alludes to the "caravans of Dedanites" in Arabia, and Ezekiel 27:20 speaks of Dedan as supplying Tyre with precious things. Dedan is associated with Uz in the hill country of Edom, Job's homeland. This is Uz the Elder, son of Nahor, whose grandson (by his daughter) was Uz the son of Dishan (I Chron. 1:42). Dishan was a son of Seir the Horite. Uz the Younger was Seir's grandson. Here is Seir's Horite family:








So we know that Job had Horite blood. The Horites were devotees of Horus who was called "the son of God" and "Horus of 2 Crowns". Uz, Buz and Huz represent a 3-clan Horite confederation based on kinship.

The trial of Job in which Satan acts as the accuser parallels Zechariah 3:2-6 where Satan accuses the High Priest Joshua (Yeshua). In that trial God acquits Joshua and commands that he be clothed in clean garments and crowned with 2 crowns (ataroth). This points to Jesus who as the Son of God would wear 2 crowns according to Horite Hebrew belief.

The Horite confederation is not identified as Uz, Huz and Buz, but rather as Dedan, Tema and Buz. The oldest Arabic script emanated from the North Arabian oases of Tema and Dedan in the Hijaz. Tema is known by Arabs as Taima and lies about 70 miles north-east of Dedan. Tema, Dedan and Dumah were caravan stops along the trade route from Sheba to Babylon. The Dedanites were famous for mining.

Job's kin shared appearance and life style. They dwelt in hills and built shrines in caves (such as at Petra) and the men shaved their heads (Jeremiah 25:23), as did Horite priests. This suggests that this was a confederation of Horite priestly families. Genesis 36 confirms this, listing Uz's grandson Dedan as a Horite ruler. Here we also find reference to Huz or Husham of the land of Tema (Gen. 36:34).

Bildah the "Shuhite" was a descendant of Abraham's son Shuah (Gen. 25:2). Zophar the "Naamathite" was a descendent of Naamah, the daughter of Lamech (Gen. 4:22) who married her patrilineal cousin Methuselah (Gen. 5:25).

The last of Job's kin to speak is the young man Elihu. The name Elihu, which appears only in Job, is a priestly name. In Strong's Concordance Elihu is said to mean "He is my God". However, it is more likely that the name relates to God's Word since El refers to God and Hu was the ancient Nilotic/Horite Hebrew word for the divine Word that overcomes chaos. This fits the context of the book of Job.

Elihu is of the clan of Buz. I Chronicles 5:14 tells us that the son of Buz was Jahdo and Jahdo's son was Yeshishai, the Aramaic form of Yeshua/Jesus. Elihu is the mysterious figure whose speeches fill the last chapters of the book of Job. He was likely the brother-in-law of Judah's grandson Hezron. This suggests that Elihu lived with his father Barachel in Buz but was Ram's heir. Ram was his maternal grandfather and the high priest. (Ram means "high.") This means that Elihu was a ruler-priest and an ancestor of David. It is Elihu who takes us beyond the wisdom of Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar. He moves us from the retributive justice of Job's 3 friends to the reality that "God is greater than any human being. Why then quarrel with Him for not replying to you word for word? God speaks first one way and then in another, although we do not realize it." (Job 33:12-14NJB) Elihu's 230 line discourse elaborates and illustrates how this is true.

Job and all his friends are descendants of Enoch, a man who is commended for his faith in Hebrews 11: 6. Each had his own answer to why Job was suffering, but only the suffering Job glimpsed something of the mystery of God's counsel. As a man of faith, Job remembers that "God watched over me" (Job 29:2) and that "the friendly counsel of God was over my tent" (29:4), and this sustains him in his suffering. Those who accuse him are his own kin, as was true with our Lord Jesus. Their accusations are the same as those used by the Jewish rulers to accuse Jesus, the Righteous One.

The central message of Job is to remember God at all times, even as we hope to be remembered in the eternal Kingdom. It is to love God whether enjoying life or afflicted, and to look to Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of our faith. In this sense, Job is a prophetic book which presents wisdom of the deepest kind. Patrick Henry Reardon recognizes that Job moves toward the "Bible's apocalyptic principle", that is to say, "More is happening than seems to be happening." (The Trial of Job, p. 46).

Related reading: The Horite Confederation of Uz, Buz and Huz; Job's Friends and Their Contribution to the Message of Job; Abraham and Job: Horite Rulers

Abraham's Nephews and Niece

Alice C. Linsley


Abraham's nine sons were Joktan, Ishmael, Isaac, Zimran, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, Shuah and (according to the Septuagint) Eliezar. One of Job's friends - Zophar - was a descendant of Shuah, and most of the Arabian tribes are descendants of Abraham's sons Joktan and Ishmael.

The Genesis genealogical data indicates that Abraham also had 12 nephews and at least 1 niece. Their names were Lot, Huz, Buz, Kamuel, Chesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph and Bethuel (Gen. 22:20-22). Nahor also had 4 sons by his concubine, Reumah.  Their names were Tebah, Gaham, Thahash and Maacah. This means that Nahor had 11 sons and at least 1 daughter.  Genesis 36:24 lists Anah as a ‘son’ of Zibeon and her daughter Oholibamah is listed as an Edomite chief in 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.  The listing of Nahor's daughter Maacah as a chief or "son" is consistent with this pattern.

Some groups in Genesis are 3-clan confederations (such as Isaac's 3 sons) and others are 12-tribe confederations. Nahor, Abraham's older brother, was the progenitor of twelve Aramean tribes through his  11 sons and 1 daughter. Eight were children of Milcah and four were children of Reumah (Gen. 22.20-24).

Since the lines of Nahor and Abraham intermarried, it serves us well to learn all that we can about Abraham's nephews.

Lot
Lot was the only son of Abraham's half-brother Haran.  They had the same father but different mothers.  Haran was named by his mother after her father.  This means that Haran's mother was Terah's cousin or niece bride.  Haran and Nahor were Terah's first-born sons by 2 wives.  When Haran died, Lot went to live with his Aunt Sarah.

Lot's maternal grandfather was Haran the Elder, a contemporary of Terah's father, Nahor. The kinship pattern here is exactly like that found in Genesis 4 and 5, with chiefs marrying two wives and cousin brides naming their first-born sons after their fathers.

Lot's father was somewhat younger than Nahor. This is discernable because cousin wives were second wives, taken shortly before the heir ascended to his father's throne. This suggests that Nahor married Milcah near to the time of Terah's death in Haran (just as Isaac married Rebecca, his patrilineal cousin, near the time of Abraham's death.)

Huz and Buz
Huz and Buz were Nahor's sons by Milcah (Gen. 22:20). Where we find two phonetically similar names such as these, we are to look for the hidden third. The third is Uz (Job's homeland). Uz, Huz and Buz represent 3-clan confederation based on kinship. Uz the Elder is mentioned in Genesis 10:23. His grandson was Uz, the son of Dishan (I Chron. 1:42). Dishan was a son of Seir the Horite and the brother-in-law of Esau the Younger. Uz the Younger was Seir's grandson. (See diagram here.)

I Chronicles 5:14 mentions that the son of Buz was Jahdo and Jahdo's son was Yeshishai, the Aramaic form of Yeshua/Jesus. This connects the name of Jesus with the devotees of Horus who we know as Horites. Buz is grouped with the peoples of Dedan and Tema in Jeremiah 25:23. This explains why this Horite confederation is identified as Dedan, Tema and Buz. (The oldest Arabic script emanated from the North Arabian oases of Tema and Dedan in the Hijaz.)

Kamuel
Kamuel was the father of Aram the Younger. Aram the Elder was one of Shem's sons (Gen. 10:22) and he had a son named Uz. The name Kemuel  is found in Numbers 34:24  where a descendent of Kemuel is named as a leader for the Ephraimites.  I Chronicles 27:17 tells us that the Ephraimite Kemuel had a son named Hashabiah who was a Levite chief. In I Chronicles 26:30, this same Hashabiah is called a "Hebronite" and is put "in charge of Israel west of Jordan in everything pertaining to Yahweh and to the service of the king."

Hebron was the land of four peoples in Abraham's time. It was called Kiriath Arba, from the Akkadian kiprat arba - four regions/four peoples. Hebron was where Sarah resided and her settlement marked the northern boundary of Abraham's territory in Edom.

Chesed, Pildash and Jidlaph and Gaham
The Bible doesn't provide sufficient genealogical information to trace them. However, their names tell us that they are ethnically Kushites and probably intermarried as was the custom of the Horites.

Chesed is Hesed in Hebrew and Kashed in the Proto-Kushite. This explains why the Hebrew word for Chaldeans is Kashedim. The Chaldeans of Ur were kin to Nahor’s Kushite people.

The name Pildash is related to the word pelada, meaning iron. This word is found only once in the Hebrew Scriptures, in Nahum 2:3, “the chariots are enveloped in flashing iron.” One of Nahor’s sons is connected to metalwork in the early Iron Age.

The name Jidlaph is related to the names Jedidiah and Jeduthun, JD is the root of the names. Jedidiah was the name that the prophet-priest Nathan gave to Solomon. Jeduthun was the choirmaster named in Psalm 77. These names are related to names with the JE root: Jeiel and Jecoliah. Jediel was a scribe who helped to organize Uzziah’s army (II Chron. 26:11). Jecoliah of Jerusalem was the mother of King Uzziah (II Chron. 26:4).

The name Gaham reflects the Hamitic heritage of Abraham’s people. The name Gaham does not occur in Hebrew because it an Egyptian name. Ga-Ham means of the family father Ham. The G is a patronymic prefix. A patronym is a component of a personal name based on the name of one's father, grandfather or an earlier male ancestor.

Hazo

Hazo refers to the “kingdoms of Hazor” mentioned in Jeremiah 49:28 and called “Hezron” in Joshua 15:25. These people were kin and allies of the people of Beersheba (Joshua 15:28).

Bethuel

Bethuel was the father of Laban and Rebecca, Isaac's cousin wife. He presents one of the thorniest questions in Genesis: Why didn't Rebecca name her first-born son after her father? The answer has to do with Laban. He was designated to rule over Bethuel's territory, so Rebecca's first-born son was not in line to rule in Padan-Aram. Nor would Rachel and Leah's first-born sons rule there.

Tebah

The name Tebah is related to the verb to sacrifice and to the noun that denotes the lamb, ram, calf or bull that is to be slaughtered. The verb used for the sacrificial Messianic offering in Isaiah 53:7, and the release of all nations in Isaiah 34:2. A descendant of Tebah served as a Temple gatekeeper according to I Chronicles 26:11.

Thahash

Priest of Ancient Egypt 

This son of Nahor was likely a tanner of animal skins, a ta-hash. Exodus 25:5 speaks of "five rams' skins dyed red, and tahash skins; acacia wood." This suggests that he was in the priestly caste. These were called "sarki" in the ancient Afro-Asiatic world. The sarki sacrificed animals and tanned the hides. God acts as the first sarki when He sacrifices animals to make coverings for the man and the woman (Gen. 3:21). Today Sarki live in the Orissa province of India, and as rulers in Orisha, Nigeria. They are also in the Tarai region of Nepal. Sometimes they are called “Har-wa” which is the ancient Egyptian word for Horite priest. Even today the Buddhist priests of central Asia wear attire very similar to the priests of ancient Egypt.


Maacah

The wife of Machir (I Chron.7:15-16) was named Maacah. Another Maacah was one of Caleb's wives (I Chron. 2:48) and one of David's wives was named Maacah (II Sam. 3:3). This being the case, Maacah may be a daughter of Nahor, rather than a son. This would follow a pattern in which at least one daughter is named for the patriarchs. Of Jacob's offspring, Dinah is the only daughter named. Among Zibeon's sons, a daughter Anah is listed (Gen. 36:24) and Anah's daughter Oholibamah is listed as an Edomite chief (Gen. 36:41). Maacah probably married one of Abraham's sons and came to reside in Canaan. Most likely she married Joktan, Abraham's first-born son by Keturah. Joktan the Elder was the son of Eber and the father of Sheba. This would explain why Sheba, who contested David's right tor rule, sought refuge in Abel beth-Maacah. He has kin there

David's son Absalom, son of Maacah, opposed his father and lost his life. Another man who opposed David's authority was Sheba. He fled to the city of Abel beth-Maacah where he lost his life. Likely, the city Abel of beth-Maacah derived its name from Nahor's daughter, an Aramean princess. That city was ravaged by Ben-Hadad of Damascus (I Kgs 15:16-20). It was also captured by Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, in the days of Pekah of Israel. Abel beth-Maacah;was an important shrine city close to the border of Lebanon. This is where Sheba fled, hoping to escape Joab's soldiers.

David's son Absalom, son of Maacah, opposed his father and lost his life. Another man who opposed David's authority was Sheba. He fled to the city of Abel beth-Maacah where he lost his life.

Sheba traveled through all the tribes of Israel to Abel of Beth Maacah and all the Berite region. When they had assembled, they too joined him. So Joab’s men came and laid siege against him in Abel of Beth Maacah. They prepared a siege ramp outside the city which stood against its outer rampart. As all of Joab’s soldiers were trying to break through the wall so that it would collapse, a wise woman called out from the city, “Listen up! Listen up! Tell Joab, ‘Come near so that I may speak to you.” (II Sam. 20-14-16 NET)

The wise woman of Abel beth-Maacah reasons with Joab, reminding him that this town was a place where people came for advice to end a dispute. She said, I represent the peaceful and the faithful in Israel. You are attempting to destroy an important city in Israel. Why should you swallow up the Lord’s inheritance? (II Sam. 20:19)


Related reading:  Was Keturah Abraham's Wife?; Eliezar of Damascus; Abraham's Two Concubines, Lot's Story

Tomb of Nubian Priest Found

Archaeologists have rediscovered the 'lost' tomb an ancient Egyptian priest at the Theban Necropolis in Egypt. It was announced today by Egypt's Minister of Culture, Farouk Hosny, that the team excavating and conservating the tomb has now cleared the burial shaft of tomb and reached its burial chamber.

The tomb is located at Qurnet Murai, south Assasif, on the west bank of the Nile opposite to Luxor, and belonged to a priest named Karakhamun. It dates to the 25th Dynasty (the Reign of Shabaqo, circa 700BC) and is referenced as TT223 (Theban Tomb 223). The el-Assasif area is a well known archaeological site, containing nobles’ tombs from the New Kingdom, as well as the 25-26th Dynasties.

Read it all here.
 
As this tomb dates to the reign of Sheba-qo, the priest would more accurately be designated as Kushite.

There appears to be an attempt to minimize the importance of this find, yet it is admitted that the tomb is one of the most beautifully decorated. The writer states: " His priestly title, First 'k Priest, does not signify any particular importance." 
 
I find this an extraordinary remark since Ka is widely associated with ancient Nubian and Sudanese rulers and priests.  Ka is the life that animates the body. It represents the hope of life after death. The ka and the ba were to be united in order for the deceased to avoid "the second death". The unification of Ba and Ka happened after death by means of the proper offerings, prayers, and mummification. There was a risk of dying the second death if the unified soul and life force were condemned in the afterlife. Dying the second death meant not becoming an "akh." Only as an akh could one enjoy the resurrection life. The term "Ka-ba-lah" is derived from ancient Egyptian/Nubian mystical thought.

K also refers to "Khamit", the original Nubian culture of the Nile Valley. Pepi II, who reigned from about 2278 BC–2184 BC, held the throne name Nefer-ka-Re, meaning "Beautiful is the Ka of Re.” Ka is linguistically related to the first ruler named in Genesis - Kain. It is also found in the Nubian name for queen - Kandace.


Related reading:  Tomb of Purification Priest; Origins of the Priesthood; Who Were the Horites?

Giants and Dwarfs in the Bible

 

Alice C. Linsley

 

I received these images and a map of the Holy Land marked to show the supposed site of these finds. I was immediately suspicious given the depth at which the bodies were found. They should be at least 8 feet below ground level to fit the period of biblical history they are intended to support. The information comes from here. There is no verification of this in any peer-reviewed journal, and were such a discovery made by Biblical archaeologists you can be sure that they would be shouting about their discovery! It would at least get a mention in Biblical Archaeology Review.

That said, the Biblical account of giants is already verified. The Sara people tell of giants living among them. Sarah, Abraham’s half-sister wife was of the Sara tribe. She dwelt in Hebron and Hebron was called Kiriath-Arba (Arabic name). Old Arabic (Dedanite) is older than biblical Hebrew. The Sara tribe originated in west central Africa. The largest population of Sara lives in Chad (where Noah’s flood took place about 8,000 years ago.). The social organization of the Sara closely resembles the social organization of Abraham’s ancestors. Sara society is organized by patrilineal descent from a common male ancestor. There is a 3-clan confederation such as characterizes Abraham's people.

The qir-ka are the eastern Sara, the qin-ka are those living in central Chad, and the qel-ka are the western groups. The Sara today are descendants of an earlier 3-tribe confederation of warriors and kingdom builders. According to Sara legend, there were giants among them. These are likely the Anunnaki or Anakim, also called Nephilim. They are the gibboriym - mighty ones. The Kushite kingdom builder Nimrod is an example.

Dwarfs were also common among Abraham's Nilo-Saharan ancestors.

 This Bes figurine dates to
between 1070 and 800 B.C.

 Dwarf figurines were popular
in the ancient world.

Yaksha, the dwarf (shown right) was venerated in the area where remains of giant men were found in 1936 in central Africa at Lake El-yasi.  The Sanskrit word "yaksha" is related to the Kushite word "yashi."  In ancient Egypt the dwarf Bes (shown below) was venerated as a semi-divine ruler.

The dwarf figurine was found widely in the ancient world, from the Upper Nile to Turkey. Excavations at Ziyaret Tepe in southeastern Turkey uncovered the body of a man who was buried with a Bes figurine.

 

At Nekhen in Sudan, many graves of dwarfs have been found. These were buried in such a way as to indicate that they held high rank among the Nilo-Saharans. In the 2012 Nekhen report, we read, "A number of ivory figurines attest to a special interest in dwarfs in Predynastic times, but none have provenance. Better documented are the statuettes from the Early Dynastic temple caches, for example at Tel el Farkha, where 13 little dwarf figurines were found. Although female dwarfs are more commonly depicted in this context, possibly due to an association with fertility, in the court of the Dynasty I kings, it was male dwarfs that were honored by burial amongst the royal retainers and commemorated with high quality stelae, showing that they were valued as personal attendants, just as they would continue to be in the Old Kingdom."  (From here.)

By the time of the First Temple in Jerusalem, dwarfs were not permitted to enter the place of worship. "For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; no man with a crippled foot or hand, or who is a hunchback or a dwarf, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles." (Leviticus 21:17-20)

The story of Jesus staying in the home of Zacchaeus the dwarf shows that God is not offended by this so-called deformity.

Diversity of Biblical Peoples

It is evident that there was a great diversity of peoples in the time described in Genesis 10.  This includes giants, dwarfs, and black, red and brown Nubians.

 

Red and black Nubians
(Ippolito Rosellini)

Red and brown Nubians
(Dr. Arthur Brack)

There were also castes and these practiced endogamy (marriage exclusively within the caste). These include the Kenite metal workers, the Horite ruler-priests and the Tahash (Madiga) leather workers. Genetic traits were preserved through the endogamous marriage pattern.

Related reading: Genesis on the Ancient Kingdom Builders; The Origin of Castes; Kushite Diversity and Unity; Sudan is Archaeologically Rich

Abraham's Kushite Ancestors

Alice C. Linsley


Linguistics and DNA studies have shown that Abraham and his ancestors were Kushites whose cultural context was that of the Afro-Asiatic Dominion which extended from West Africa to India. The region in red shows the area of Kushite rule. The Kushites included many peoples and they ranged in appearance from brown to red to black.

The Afro-Asiatic Dominion
(Image from Clyde A. Winters Study of Haplogroup R-M173)

This corresponds with information about Abraham's father, Terah.  He is associated with the Nilotic Ainu who are at the center of Cavali-Sforza's genetic distance chart. This is to be expected of the "First People."  The Ainu spread far and wide.  They went east to Japan and north to Southern Siberia.  They traveled from Finland to Greenland and Labrador and from there to the eastern coastline of Canada.  Native Americans tribes in the X Haplogroup have Ainu blood.



Who were the Afro-Asiatics?


The Ainu writing system of Japan is virtually idnetical to the Hebrew writing system, evidence that the Nilotic Ainu must be classified as Afro-Asiatics. 

The term "Afro-Asiatic" is a general classification of peoples who speak Afro-Asiatic languages. The majority of these languages is spoken in Africa. There are three main groups: Saharan Africans, Afro-Arabians, and Aramean Afro-Asiatics. The last two can be traced back to the region of Africa known as ancient Kush. There is much evidence for the Kushite migration out of Africa, including DNA studies. The Kushites were great kingdom builders who controlled the major water systems at a time when this part of the world was much wetter.

The original context of the story of the creation of Adam is Nilotic. Adam is derived from the root DM which refers to blood (dam in Hebrew). The words edom and adam both mean red or reddish-brown. In Hausa the word for reddish-brown is odom. (Esau who married a Horite bride, Oholibamah, was designated edom.) This is a reference to the color of the soil from which Adam was made. Abraham's Kushite ancestors lived where the soil was reddish-brown. This is likely the red soil that washed down from the Ethiopian Highlands. These soils have a cambic B horizon. Chromic Cambisols have a strong brown or red colour.

Abraham's ancestors migrated from the Upper Nile Valley and the Horn of Africa to the coastal areas of Arabia. There they became established in separate territories which took their names from their rulers: Dedan, Sheba, Joktan. etc. Centuries later, these clans became separated into Afro-Arabians and Afro-Asiatics. Genesis says that this took place in the time of Peleg.


Kushite Migration Out of Africa


Archaeogeneticists employ genetics, archaeology and linguistics to examine the origin and spread of people groups. Haplogroup R-M173 is of particular significance because this pertains to the ancient Kushite and Nilotic peoples who are genetically related.

At least three migrations out of Africa have taken place in the past 120,000 years. The first that has been documented took place in the Late Pleistocene (120,000-12,000 B.C.). Here the movement was from the Upper Nile Valley and the Horn into the coastal areas of Arabia. Evidence indicates that Nilotic peoples moved out of Africa in several directions. Thomas Strasser and his team have found hundreds of stone Age tools of African origin on the island of Crete. Others have been found on the Iranian plateaus, helping experts trace the steps of an Nilotic tribe that passed through the region on their way to India where it settled in the Andaman Islands. The tribe has all the physical features of black East Africans. Their ancestors are believed to have migrated out of East Africa about 60,000 year ago. According to Hamed NasabVahdati, a member of the archeological society at Iran's Cultural Heritage Center, the Stone Age artifacts found in Iran are very similar to those found in East Africa.

The most recent involved the African population known as Kushites. In a study conducted under the direction of Clyde A. Winters at the Uthman dan Fodio Institute in Chicago, data from archaeology, linguistics, genetics and craniometric studies were used to explore the role of the Kushites in the spread of haplogroup R from Africa to Eurasia. Here we find that the Dravidians of India originated in ancient Kush:


“There is genetic, linguistic and archaeological evidence pointing to the African origin of the Dravidian speakers in India (Aravanan 1980; Winters 2007). Lal (1963) research suggests that the Dravidian speaking people may have belonged to the C-Group. The C-Group people spread culture from Nubia into Arabia, Iran and India as evidenced by the presence of Black-and-Red Ware (BRW). Although the Egyptians preferred the cultivation of wheat, many ancient C-Group [Kushite] people w ere agro-pastoral people who cultivated Millet/Sorghum and raised cattle. It was the Dravidians who probably took millet to India (C. Winters, 2008b)."


Factors that Drove Kushite Expansion

Factors that drove Kushite expansion inlcude migration, commerce, conquest and the distinctive marriage pattern of the Kushite ruler-priests known as Horites, Habiru or Hapiru. In this essay we examine the Horite marriage pattern which was characterized by endogamy, that is, exclusive intermarried of the ruler-priest lines. This is the case with the lines of Cain and Seth, Ham and Shem, Abraham and Terah, and in David's time among the Levitical lines.
 
For our purposes, the key lines to consider are those from which Abraham descends. These are the lines of Ham and Shem which intermarried, making it possible to trace the Kushite ancestry of Abraham through the cousin bride's naming prerogative.  Here is a diagram showing Abraham's Kushite ancestry. Both Asshur the Younger and his brother Arpachsad are called "sons of Shem" because they belong to Shem's house, not to the house of their father Nimrod. 
 
Each Horite ruler-priest had two wives. One was a half-sister and the other, married later in life, was a patrilineal cousin or niece. The firstborn son of the sister wife ascended to the throne of his biological father.  The firstborn son of the cousin/niece wife ascended to the throne of his maternal grandfather, after whom he was named.
 
The rulers also had two concubines, as did Abraham and Jacob.  The firstborn sons of concubines, along with the younger sons of wives, were given gifts and sent away to conquer or settle away from the ruling sons. So we read in Genesis 25:6 that Abraham gave gifts to all his sons and sent them away from Isaac, his son by his sister-wife Sarah. For further explanation of this, go here.
 
This marriage pattern drove Kushite expansion across the Afro-Asiatic Dominion.

The Ainu Connection

Abraham's father was Tera, a named associated with the Ainu who originated in the Upper Nile Valley.  Tera (Terah) means priest in the Ainu language. Genesis 10 describes the Ainu dispersion out of Africa into Mesopotamia.  The Ainu went as far east as Japan and north to Finland.  From Finland they crossed through Greenland and Labrador to the eastern seaboard of Canada. My Ainu friend Sea’Key tells me that the Ainu of eastern Canada have a red skin tone and are bearded. Some have green eyes. The red skin hue may appear as rosey cheeks or a reddish tone to tanned skin.

Abraham means “burnt father” and refers to his reddish skin color. In Arabic, the word ham means burnt. The Nilotic peoples were referred to burnt because they had a reddish skin tone. This included some Nubians, as is evidenced from the drawings of Jean-Francois Champollion who lead the Franco-Tuscan Expedition of 1828. One drawing depicts a scene from the Great Temple at As in which some Nubian captives of Ramesses II are black and others are red.

Captive Nubians
Detail from a Champollion drawing 

Genesis 25 tells us that Rebekah gave birth to twins. One was born with a red skin color and was hairy.  He was known as a great hunter. What color was Jacob?  Perhaps he was black.




Related reading:  The Nile-Japan Ainu Connection; A Kindling of Ancient Memory; Tracing Christ's Kushite Ancestors; Who Were the Kushites?; What Language Did Abraham Speak?

Cousin Brides and Their Ruler Sons

Alice C. Linsley


The succession of rulers in Genesis indicates that first-born sons of sister brides were in line to rule after their fathers. So Isaac was in line to rule after Abraham, since Sarah was Abraham's half-sister. The first-born sons of cousin brides did not rule over their fathers’ territories. Instead they ascended to the throne of their maternal grandfathers. So Joktan, Abraham's first-born by his cousin bride Keturah, would succeed to the throne of Joktan, Keturah's father.

After years of studying descent systems, Claude Levi-Strauss noted that in patrilineal systems mother and child belong to different clans. In the case of Abraham’s ancestors, the cousin bride belongs to her husband’s house while her first-born son belongs to her father’s house. This is confirmed in Genesis 10:22, where we find that Nimrod’s first-born son by a daughter of Asshur is called a “son” of Shem.

Ham                Shem

Kush               Asshur

                 Nimrod      =     Asshur’s daughter
 ǀ

                Asshur the Younger (“son” of Shem)

A Blog Dedicated to Biblical Anthropology

I have started a new blog dedicated to Biblical Anthropology. It is unique and I hope that you will visit.  Here are the topics that have been presented in the first week.

African Context of Biblical Material

Climate Cycles and Noah's Flood

Who were the Hapiru?

What Does a Biblical Anthropologist Do?

The Bible and Anthropological Investigation

Is Biblical Anthropology an Oxymoron?

Readers of Just Genesis will find that this blog supplements the material on Genesis.  I look forward to reading your comments.

Best wishes,
Alice

Paul H. Sheely on YEC Dogma and Concordism

Alice C. Linsley

Paul H. Sheely is a member of the American Scientific Affiliation. He lives in Portland, Oregon. I agree with him on many points, especially his perceptive and sound arguments against Young-Earth Creationism.

Paul is a fine biblical anthropologist and I agree with most of what he has written. However, I want to respond to some things he says here.  My comments (in brown) follow what Sheely has written.

Sheely: With regard to the historicity of Genesis 1–11, we can learn something from creation science. It also claims to believe that the history in Genesis 1–11 is accurate history that agrees with the historical/ scientific facts. Most readers of this journal are well aware that the way creation science squares the biblical account with the historical/scientific facts is by rejecting the overwhelming consensus of the best-trained scientists in the relevant sciences and substituting in its place private interpretations of the scientific data. In addition it finds evidence in Scripture for items which Old Testament scholars do not find there, like multiple volcanoes exploding at the time of the flood.

Genesis 1-11 contains both myth and genealogical (kinship) information. These genres are so distinct that we can hardly consider chapters 1-11 as a unit. Old Testament scholars are largely influenced by rabbinic thought and are far from scientific in their approach to Genesis. Extrusive volcanism in the Bible is not mentioned in relation to Noah's flood. However, it is mentioned in reference to the production of land masses. The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth;by understanding hath he established the heavens. By his knowledge the depths are broken up, and the clouds drop down the dew. (Proverbs 3:19, 20)

We can imagine a great sea with steam rising from deep underwater fissures in the earth. Now imagine volcanoes rising up from the sea. These are the "pillars of the earth" described in Job 9:6 which says, "Who shakes the earth out of its place, and its pillars tremble." These are called God's pillars according to I Samuel 2:8 - "For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s and he had set the world upon them."The emergence of dry land from a cosmic sea is described in the oldest religious narratives. One of the oldest creation accounts is found among the ancient Egyptians. They envisioned the first place in the world as a mound emerging from the waters of a universal ocean. Here the first life form was seen as a lily, growing on the peak of the primeval mound. The emerging mound was named TaTJaNuN, a reference to TT (twin peaks) and nun (water). TTJNN likely means the "pillars of God in the water" and is a reference to volcanic peaks emerging from the universal ocean. I Samuel 2:8 states that these "pillars of the earth" belong to God. (Also see Psalm 75:2,3; and Job 9:6.)

Sumerian commercial records, the Egyptian Coffin Texts, and the Hebrew Scriptures all point to the belief of the ancient Afro-Asiatic peoples that the dry land earth emerged from a watery chaos. In the Coffin Texts we read these words from the Creator, "I was the one who began (everything), the dweller in the Primeval Waters. First Hahu emerged from me and then I began to move."

Ha-hu is the wind that separated the waters above from the waters below and caused the erosion of the dry land so that it spread out. In Hebrew the Spirit that moved over the water at the beginning (Genesis 1) is called ruach, and ruach also means breath or wind.


Sheely: Is concordism any different? Despite the honesty of the concordists with regard to the relevant sciences, concordism squares the biblical account with the historical/ scientific facts primarily by rejecting the overwhelming consensus of the best-trained Old Testament scholars and substituting in its place private interpretations of the biblical data. With regard to pre-Adamites, it finds evidence for them in Scripture in places where Old Testament scholars do not find them.

Adam appears to be the founder of the lines of archaic rulers who are listed in Genesis 4, 5, 10, 11, 25 and 36. Before Adam's time, humans had already widely dispersed out of Africa. Adam and Eve are representative first parents and must be understood as the literal first created humans.

Sheely: As for a local flood, which has become a standard staple of concordism, the overwhelming consensus of Old Testament biblical scholars is that the Bible is saying that the Flood was anthropologically universal and that during the Flood the entire earth was virtually returned to its pre-creation state described in Gen. 1:2.

Noah's flood was a large, yet local event in the region of Lake Chad during the Gurian Wet Period or the Aqualithic (500 years of monsoonal rains in the Sahara). From Noah's perspective in the region of Lake Chad, the flood waters covered the entire world and destroyed his civilization. Was his the only civilization on Earth at that time? No. By Noah's time the Rib peoples had dispersed into Anatolia, Bactria, Brittany, Northern Spain and the southern British Isles.

One need not take my word for it. Go to a good theological library and find twenty commentaries on Genesis by qualified Old Testament scholars. Carefully read the sections supposedly supporting pre-Adamites and the section on the flood. You will be lucky to find even two Old Testament scholars who think Scripture is speaking of pre-Adamites or a local flood. Concordism is not resting upon any firmer a foundation than is creation science. It simply prefers a private interpretation of the Bible to a private interpretation of science.

I agree that the assumptions of concordism are as dangerous as those of Young-Earth Creationism. Private interpretation is a problem, but that's not what we have in the case of either concordism or young Earth creationism. Both attempts to reconcile Genesis with science are examples of uninformed contemporary group-think.

Despite its sincerity, effort, and hopeful thinking, concordism’s Day-age, pre-Adamites, local flood, and local language at the Tower of Babel are rejections of the historical accuracy of Genesis 1–11. Concordism replaces the history offered in Genesis 1–11 with a different history based on private interpretations which are determined not by the context of Scripture, but by the findings of modern science.

Assumptions about what Genesis says are dangerous no matter who makes them. Assumptions, not science, are the problem. Young-Earth Creationists filter the Biblical information through their preconceived and racist template. They find dinosaurs under Neolithic rocks and make Adam and Eve white Europeans.

This does not mean that creation science gets off scotfree with reference to its interpretation of Scripture. For one thing, as Dick Fischer pointed out in his paper (PSCF 55 [Dec. 2003]: 222–31), the “fountains of the great Deep” (Gen. 7:11) are fresh water terrestrial fountains; and it is they along with rain that supplied the water for the flood.4.

The ocean, which is not fresh water, cannot be employed as a means of flooding the globe (or half the globe à la Godfrey/Aardsma) without doing the same thing that concordists are doing: replacing the history in Genesis 1–11 with a private interpretation.

Calvin’s doctrine of accommodation, which I believe should be followed in principle, has a great advantage over creation science and concordism in that it allows both the Bible and the scientific data to freely say what they say. Concordism and creation science with their private interpretations have replaced the reality of Scripture and science with an illusion.
 
Calvin wasn't a scientist either. There is no conflict between Genesis and science when both are allowed to speak in their own languages. Anthropological research has demonstrated that Genesis presents an accurate and verifiable picture of Abraham's Nilotic ancestors to whom God made a promise that the Woman's Seed would be born of their ruler-priest lines (Gen. 3:15). The Bible is their story and it is foremost about the origin of Messianic expectation, not human origins.


Notes


1It would be just as misleading to say Genesis 1–11 is either “fiction” or “myth” as to say that the early geology books which explain the results of the Missoula floods as being due to glaciers were either fiction or myth. Genesis 1–11, like those early geology books, is the outmoded history/science of those times.

Geological evidence appears to be the obsesssion among both Young Earth Creationists and condordists. They make strange claims about dating of earth and moon rocks and about the age of the Grand Canyon. They tend to stay away from human origins because they cannot reconcile discoveries like that of 77,000 year old mattresses and 100,000 stone tools with their Young-Earth interpretations.

2The fact that New Testament writers accept Genesis 1–11 as historical only proves that modern history/science was not revealed to them any more than to the Old Testament writers.

New Testament writers accept as historical the promise made to Abraham's ancestors that the Son of God would be born of their ruler-priests lines. That promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ whose mother was the virgin daughter of a Hebrew ruler-priest, Joachim.

3My book, Inerrant Wisdom, develops this thesis. 4Cf. Gerhard F. Hasel, “The Fountains of the Great Deep,” Origins 1, no. 2 (1974): 67–72.

Paul H. Seely
Portland, OR


Related reading:  Dating Adam: Paul H. Sheely Proposes a solution; Haplogroups of Interest to Biblical Anthropologists; The Pillars of the Earth

On the Lighter Side

Evangelical Colleges Battle Over Creationism

Alice C. Linsley


The September 2010 issue of World Magazine has an article about why young-earth creationists should be welcomed at Christian colleges.  Of course, most young-earth creationists are welcome, but that's not the point of the article really. The point is that among Christian colleges there is a range of views on the question of creation.  All agree that God is the Creator and that He created matter ex nihilo (from nothing). Most insist that Adam and Eve are historical persons, although this is not what the genealogies of Genesis actually reveal.

Calvin College in Michigan teaches "evolutionary theory as the best scientific explanation for the dynamic diversity of life on Earth."  Young-earth creationists probably wouldn't find that biology department a comfortable choice. I'd want to know why the evolutionary paradigm fails so completely when it comes to human origins.

Biola in California insists that creation models that seek to harmonize Genesis with science (concordism)should hold to 3 principles: 1. "God providentially directs His creation"; 2. He intervened at specific points in the creation process, and 3. He created Adam and Eve. To colleges that encourage concordism I recommend John H. Walton's book on Genesis, in which he warns of the dangers of concordism:

"If we accept Genesis 1 as ancient cosmology, then we need to interpret it as ancient cosmology rather than translate it into modern cosmology. If we try to turn it into modern cosmology, we are making the text say something that it never said. It is not just a case of adding meaning (as more information has become available) it is a case of changing meaning. Since we view the text as authoritative, it is a dangerous thing to change the meaning of the text into something it never intended to say."

The World Magazine article deals only with the question of geological dating.  The grand canyon was the subject of discussion and the young-earth creationists believe it was carved when Noah's flood propelled "huge amounts of water at 100 miles per hour against rock walls" (p. 45). I wonder how the flood waters from the Lake Chad area shot so fast to Arizona? : )

The question of human origins isn't addressed in the article and I know why.  It is going to be very difficult to explain human artifacts dating to 800,000 years ago.  Even if one argues that the dating is wrong, say by half, we are still looking at hundreds of hand crafted axes dating to 400,000 years ago.  That hardly supports a young-earth position.

The explanation that is given is this: God created things with the appearance of age.  Why would God cause man-made axes to appear older?  The explanation is given that Christ aged the wine at Canaan. Talk about assumptions! The best wine for general tastes isn't always the oldest or driest.

The more I read about the creation-evolution confusion in evangelical colleges the more I realize that the problem isn't science, but assumptions about what Genesis says.  Assumptions, not facts, are what cause confusion. Until people gain a better understanding of the cultural context of the people from whom this material comes, these colleges will only continue to muddy the waters.


Related reading:  Genesis: Is It Really About Human Origins?; Qesem Cave Finds in Perspective; Plato and Intelligent Design; Genesis and Genetics; Q and A on Creation and Evolution; Theories of Creation: An Overview; The Oldest Human Fossils

Sodom's Death and the Birth of Sons

Alice C. Linsley

Sodom was a large city of the Plain well south of Mamre where Abraham pitched his tent between Ai (on the west) and Bethel (on the east).  Here in the heat of the day, Abraham was visited by the Three Person God (Baal Shalisha) who spoke to Abraham of the impending judgment of Sodom. The Septuagint adds Gomorrah to the narrative, but in the Masoretic Text, the focus is on Sodom because this is where Lot resided. Lot was Abraham's nephew, the son of Abraham's brother Haran.

The destruction of the city is described to Abraham in Genesis 18 and the city's is remembered by this description, which in Arabic is sdm, meaning "One who causes a collision with bad results".  Very likely the true name of the city has been lost. However, there is no reason to doubt that a major city existed in the area described. Canaan had many ancient shrine cities in the time of the Partiarchs. Some of these, such a Hazor, were overthrow in the time of Joshua.

The overthrow of the city and the angelic rescue of Lot and his family is described in chapter 19.  Chapters 18 and 19 have a chiastic structure (ABB'A').  The Jewish Study Bible gives this structure: 18:1-15, the annunciation of Issac's birth - A; 18:16-33, the annunication of Sodom's destruction - B; 19:1-29 the destruction of Sodom - B; and 19:30-38, the report of the birth of 2 sons to Lot.

This structure suggests that the narrative may originally have been from Lot's point of view rather than from Abraham's. Here Lot's two sons become the fathers of nations just as Abraham's son Isaac will become  the father of a nation. The theme of two sons for Lot and one son for Abraham seems to point to a tradition associated with Lot.

The suggestion that Lot's sons were the product of incest is likely a later addition to the text, intended to disgrace the Ammonite and Moabites. Or it may be that this carefully worded narrative is intended to deflect the drunken patriarch's sexual misbehavior upon his daughters. Genesis 19:8 says that Lot offered his daughters who "have never slept with a man" to the Sodomites. These were chaste young women. Sexually inexperienced.  It seems unlikely that they would have initiated sex with their father. This is not the first time that the drunken behavior of the father leads to a bad name for his children. We remember how Noah awoke from a drunken stupor and cursed Canaan (who wasn't born yet).  He did not curse his son Ham because Ham would become a ruler after Noah and the lines of Ham and Shem would intermarry.

Noah was angry because his son Ham had looked upon his nakedness. Jacob was angry because his son Reuben slept with his concubine. This "exposed" the father's nakedness.  Noah’s curse falls on Canaan, Ham’s son, which is a deflection of guilt. Jacob’s blessing of Joseph's sons places the youngest above the first-born. The excuse given for Jacob’s behavior is that he was blind. The excuse given for Noah’s behavior is that he was drunk. 

The curse of Canaan parallels the curse of Cain (Gen. 4:11). Cain’s curse involves his being expelled from his homeland. The curse of Canaan is intended to justify Israel’s driving out of the inhabitants of principal cities of the Canaanites. Many of these cities were shrine centers with Horite ruler-priests, also known as Ha-biru (Hebrew). Some of the Hebrew rulers married Canaanite woman who were also of the Horite ruler caste. This appears to be the case with Salmon, of the tribe of Judah, who married Rahab.

The chiastic structure place the destruction of the Sodomites between the promise of a son for Abraham and the birth of two sons to Lot.  Three sons represent a tribal confederation in Genesis, so the destruction of the cities of the Dead Sea Plain made way for these Horites to populate the area, which they did. Mount Harun was sacred to the Horites. (Har and Hur are related to the words Horim and Horite.)

The Cities of the Plain

The kingdoms of Moab and Ammon were in what is now central Jordan. Although not confirmed, the site of Sodom may be what remains of the ancient walled town of Numeira which was consumed by fire around 2350 BC. The town of Zoar, to which Lot fled, is south of Numeira.

Excavations over two seasons at Numeira uncovered the foundations of homes and the remains of a winery. Deuteronomy 32:32 refers to the vineyards of Sodom, "For their vine is of the vine of Sodom and of the fields of Gomorrah; their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter."

The cities of the plain had relatively large populations, as evidenced by the cemeteries found there.  The cemeteries of Numeria and Khanazir have not been located. The Early Bronze Age burial grounds at Safi and Feifa are as large as those found at Bab edh-Dhra which contains 500,000 bodies, some in shaft tombs dating to 3200 B.C. The number of burials in this area of the Dead Sea is greater than 1,500,000 bodies, indicating that this was a heavily populated area in the time of the Patriarchs.

Related reading:  Lot's Story; Lot's Daughters; Searching for Sodom; Genesis on Homosex: Beyond Sodom; Who Were the Canaanites?; Hazor's Destruction: Another Theory; Finding Sodom

Extraordinary Questions!

(Answers are in the Combox, but don't peek until you have tried to answer on your own!)


People visit Just Genesis from all over the world.  They often come to this site by searching for an answer to an interesting question.  The following are some of the more extraordinary questions that have been asked recently. Given that many readers of Just Genesis have become very astute at answering questions of this nature, I encourage you to take a shot at answering these tough ones!

Interesting and Unusual Questions


What was the symbol for a priest in 2300 B.C.?  (Clue: When visible, it caused ancient man much anxiety.)

What does the phrase “holy to Anath” refer to? (Clue: Trace linguistic root of name "Anath".)

Were the Patriarchs from Abraham to David patrilineal or matrilineal? (Clue:  Primogeniture + cousin bride's naming prerogative.)

If the moral/natural-law tradition calls reason good, why can’t reason still be good when it concludes that said tradition is without value for the modern world? (Clue: Binary distinctions)

Were Adam and Eve the first humans or the first Israelites? (Clue: African creation stories involving first ancestors.)

If the tower of Babel is the origin of all the languages spoken today why aren’t there more languages listed in the Table of Nations in Genesis 10? (Clue: Who are the tellers of this biblical story?)

Who was Canaan’s mother? (Clue: Ham is the father of Canaan and Ham and Shem's lines intermarried.)

What are the names of Zipporah’s sisters? (Clue: Zipporah was either Moses' patrilineal cousin or his half-sister.)

When was King David born?  (Clue: He was the youngest of Jesse's 12 sons and Jesse was a contemporary of Samuel.)

Binary Distinctions and Kenosis

Alice C. Linsley


A friend has observed that "Christianity does not have true dualism, because it is actually binary, a distinction which tends to become obscured. At the same time we tend to shun the inequality of the binary sets. The superior-inferior element in binary sets aligns with conquest and domination... implies to most people standards of better and worse, so the woman as inferior means she is not as good or worthy as the man. How do we transcend this and yet retain the order of binary sets in the mind of the Church--the mind of Christ? In what key ways does the life of the Church rest on binary sets?" -- Norman Coppola

The superior entity empties itself of power to serve the lesser. This is what St. Paul addresses in the relationship of husband and wife. The Apostle tells us that this earthly pattern speaks of the mystery of Christ and the Church. Jesus Christ emptied Himself (kenosis) to become a Man, and as a Man to serve the weak, redeem those in bondage to sin, and restore the lost. This would not speak with such power had He become a Woman.

We see this also in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ by the Virgin Mary. She regarded herself as a very lowly vessel and marveled that the Almighty should ask her permission to bear the Son of God. This is what makes the Magnificat in Luke's Gospel so theologically rich. Here is an expression of number 2, the least, being served by number 1 the greatest.

In saying "Yes" to God, the Virgin Mary risked her very being. This hidden part is known only where there is trust sufficient to know and be known. This is Martin Buber's I-Thou insight. Buber argued that when we take an objective view of another person, a part of us is hidden from the experience; the relating does not take place between the observer and the observed. In an I-thou encounter the whole of one's being is involved and risked. This is not a natural response, given how dangerous the world can be and how easily even good friends can betray confidences.

Yet the equation changes when the Other is God, who is superior in every way and who knows us. It is God's condescension that makes risk possible.



God is Always Number One in Biblical Symbolism

In the Biblical worldview God is always number 1 even though I assume that I am number 1 and my ego needs support that view. Only when I empty myself (kenosis) of my ego needs and accept the reality of God's absolute superiority can I begin to recognize my true value.

The 1-2 binary sequence is dynamic in this sense.  It is kenotic by nature.  The 1-2 sequence is the basis for individual identity and interpersonal relations. This is a base-2 symbolism that is without zero. Positional use of zero dates from later centuries. Likely what is viewed as the integer zero in the older binary system of 1-2 is instead a pictogram of the Sun or a symbol of the natural cycles observed by primitive man, especially the lunar and solar cycles.

This 1(self)-2 (other) is what Martin Buber identified as the I-thou construct. For Buber, God is the Eternal Thou, since the individual must relate to God as fully Other. I am therefore number one and God as Thou would be number two. There can be a reversal, of course, when I surrender my number oneness to God. Then I become number two and God takes the rightful place of the Creator as number one.

Where fear exists in a relationship, number oneness is less likely to be surrendered, especially by males.  In her seminal book, In a Different Voice, Carol Giligan (Harvard Professor of Psychology) talks about the effect of fear in women.  Because women fear loss of relationship and intimacy more than they fear loss of rights or territory, they sacrifice their rights more readily than men who more often fear loss of rights and personal territory. This is what is described in Genesis 3:16 where the Creator explains to the woman, "thy desire [Hebrew tesuqah] shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee." This is not so much a curse as a description of male-female interaction when fear enters the equation. Note that fear is the first human emotion expressed after the fall (Gen. 3:10). Because the woman now fears loss of intimacy she will desire her husband, that is, desire intimacy with him. This fits the context of Genesis 3:16 and it aligns with the use of tesuqah in Song 7:10 where is indicates sexual longing, which for women is often a yearning for intimacy more than pleasure.

As human interactions reveal, both I and thou, both 1 and 2, are essential for human survival. To speak in very basic terms, both male and female are essential for the perpetuation of the species, and Other is essential for the individuation of the individual. This is expressed in the story of Adam, who by naming the other creatures, comes to recognize that none is like himself.

To consider this from another angle, in and of myself I am not essential for the survival of the species. In the grand scheme of existence, I am simply not that important. However, my desire/will to survive makes me aspire to be number one. If the survival of the other is more important to me, I may sacrifice my number oneness. This is the meaning of the Greek word kenosis (κένωσις)- to empty oneself of oneness. It is a divine action, embodied in Jesus Christ, "who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." (Philipians 2:6-8) To understand the radical nature of this message we must explore the association of the number one with Maleness, with the Sun, with the Heavens, and with the Creator.

The number one is the referent from which 2 and all subsequent numbers (added later) derive meaning. It is likely that this binary structure is the framework for the oldest worldview.

One                                            Two

Self                                          Other
Male                                        Female
Sun/Solar                                 Moon/Lunar
Heavens/Above                        Earth/Below
Creator                                    Creation


Jesus' kenotic act was to join himself fully to the human creature - the other - by surrendering His oneness, the oneness of God. In the biblical worldview, the Creator is always number one and the Referent by which all other entities derive meaning. Is it any wonder that those who excise the divine Referent from their lives become nihilists?

In what is probably the oldest known system of symbolic communication 1 and 2 would apply to fixed observable entities that are binary opposites, allowing for mutual understanding. This is suggested by comparison of the spelling sign language systems for the deaf used worldwide.  In the Chinese spelling system (left), the first letter (corresponding to the first letter of the Chinese alphabet) positions the fingers closed and the thumb upward and the second letter (corresponding to the second letter) has the fingers upward and the thumb closed, the exact opposite. Here we have an example of the A-B or 1-2 binary sequence. These are the same first two signs in the Canadian and American sign language systems. Regardless of the alphabet, the first two letters are opposites. They represent the most fundamental sequence and the most fundamental relationship of I-Thou. (I haven't studied other spelling sign language systems, but I suspect this holds true for most.)

In various sign languages for the deaf, the index finger represents a person almost universally.  In Japanese signing, two index fingers held up with the palms facing represent two people facing each other.  Slowing bending the fingers toward each other makes the sign of two persons bowing to each other in the typical Japenese greeting. These examples are given to show that there is a universal logic to the first and second positions in the various sign languages for the deaf. The universal application of the binary sequence, whether it be letters (A-B) or numbers (1-2), suggests an inherent logic common to all human communications.

The greatest love is shown when A submits to B or when 1 bows to 2. Whether that love is reciprocated matters not.  What matters is the willingness to regard the other as greater than oneself.  What a profoundly difficult task!  It goes against every message that the world declares and it goes against the instinct of the individual ego. Our Lord Jesus showed the full extent [eis telos] of his love when He stooped to wash the disciples' feet. To show the full extent of divine love, we too must risk emptying ourselves.


Related reading:  Shamanic Practice and the Priesthood; The Importance of Binary Distinctions; Blood and Binary Distinctions