From the Historical Eve to the Virgin Mary

 

My second book is now available on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0HKTTVJQK

The astonishing contributions and enduring influence of the Hebrew wives and daughters come alive for the reader of this sequel to The First Lords of the Earth: An Anthropological Study.

The book presents neglected aspects of the cultural milieus of the women of the Bible from the historical Eve to the Virgin Mary. The chapters present evidence of their royal status, ministries to women, entrepreneurial successes, and the balance of authority between them and their Hebrew husbands.


“Alice's analysis of the kinship pattern of the biblical Hebrew opened my eyes to understand not just Genesis and not just the Pentateuch, but the whole diacronic layers in all of the Old Testament." - Shalom Rutgaizer, Israeli archaeologist and Old Testament scholar

"In terms of tertiary studies, I learned Old Testament from 'extreme liberals' as well as 'moderate conservatives.' Then for years I felt satisfied that, although by no means a specialist, I had worked out a sensible approach to the Old Testament that was authentically Christian while avoiding the pitfalls of fundamentalism, Marcionism and liberalism . . . especially with regard to the Book of Genesis.

That was until I found Alice Linsley's work. Her biblical, historical, theological, cultural, anthropological and archaeological research takes the reader into fascinating areas which really make sense and have caused me to change quite a number of my previously held views!" - David Chislett SSC, former Anglican Bishop of the Traditional Anglican Church

Related reading: BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Reading the Bible in a Different Way; Binary Reasoning and Gender Balance; Orthodoxy Requires Binary Reasoning

Binary Reasoning and Gender Balance

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The binary sets that informed the reasoning of the early Hebrew are natural and universally observed. They display a hierarchical relationship between the entities of the set. Males are larger and stronger than females. The sun is the greater light, the moon the lesser, yet both sun and moon rule their domains (Gen. 1:16). The Hebrew observation of binary sets as having both balance and hierarchy is reflected in their social structure. The social structure of the biblical Hebrew was neither matriarchal nor patriarchal. It was characterized by a male-female balance of authority and separate domains.

The binary sets of the Bible are not arbitrary. They are based on empirical observation of the order in creation. Not every set of opposites is a binary set in the biblical sense. The opposites “tall and short” do not constitute a binary set because those are contextually dependent. Were I to stand beside a Watusi warrior I would appear short. However, were I to stand beside a Pygmy, I would appear tall. The entities of a true binary set are not contextually dependent. They do not derive meaning from human experience other than their observation as natural sets: male-female, sun-moon, light-dark, and life-death.

The opposites hot-cold are not a binary set because those are subjective. What might feel cold to one person may not feel cold to another.

The Hebrew way of reasoning should be distinguished from dualistic reasoning which divides reality into two irreconcilable halves. The Egyptologist Frédéric Servajean notes that unlike dualism, Egyptian duality is integrative and dynamic. Servajean's article "Duality" in the UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology (2008) examines how ancient Egyptian reasoning involved natural pairs of opposites. He defines duality as a dynamic coexistence of two elements that balance and define each other such as light and dark and order and chaos. Servajean believes that this was the conceptual framework by which the Egyptians made sense of the cosmos. However, he does not investigate the influence of the Hebrew ruler-priests whose perceptions of the order of Creation were informed by empirical observations. When the Hebrew ruler-priests studied the order of creation they observed that one of entities in the natural pair (binary set) is greater than its partner.

My Journey to Greater Understanding

I studied for a Master of Divinity at the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Mount Airy, Pennsylvania. That degree was awarded in 1988. Many years after that I was awarded an honorary Doctor of Letters for my work on gender, specifically about the question of the ordination of women to the priesthood.

My doubts about women’s ordination launched me into a twenty-year study of that dangerous innovation. I drew on my background in anthropology, philosophy, and linguistics. I noted that no women served as priests among the biblical Hebrew. Likewise, men did not serve as midwives. This suggested that men and women have distinct types of blood work: the priests in the place of blood sacrifice where women were forbidden to enter, and the woman in the birthing chamber where men were forbidden to enter. Two types of blood work in two distinct places and the two were always maintained apart. I pondered that a great deal.

Among the biblical Hebrew who delivered to us the authoritative moral law, male and female are distinct physiologically, anatomically, emotionally, and in the roles they were created to perform. This seems obvious even to those who minimize the distinction between males and females. Some realities cannot be denied.

When Riley Gaines asked the University of Pittsburgh professor Gabby Yearwood if an archaeologist can differentiate between two sets of 100-year bones as male and female, Professor Yearwood answered “no” to which the audience of students laughed. Yearwood responded, "I'm not sure why I'm being laughed at! I'm the expert... I have a Ph.D.!" The students recognize that someone can get a Ph.D. in anthropology and still be ignorant of basic facts about humans. Forensic medicine has been identifying the sex of human remains since the 16th century, and today we have the advantage of genetic testing as well.

Pondering the two distinct types of blood work took me deeper into consideration of the binary reasoning of the biblical Hebrew. That reasoning is based on empirical observation of the hierarchies in the order of creation. These hierarchies are expressed in a small number of binary sets: Creator-creature, life-death, heaven-earth, male-female, and sun-moon. The Apostle Paul uses binary reasoning in 1 Corinthians 15 when he contrasts the Creator and the creature, the sun and the moon, and the perishable and the imperishable. 

The Church receives the reasoning of the biblical Hebrew through the Apostles. That Tradition builds a protective hedge around what the Creator has established as good. Life is greater than death. Thus, the Hebrew were never to boil a baby goat in its mother's milk (forbidden three places in Scripture). This action blurs the distinction between life and death because the mother’s milk is to sustain the life of the offspring. This prohibition represents the typical rabbinic “hedge” around the Torah.

There is a binary distinction between humans and non-human animals. Bestiality is forbidden because it blurs the distinction between humans and animals.

Homosex is forbidden because it blurs the distinction between male and female, a binary set established by God in the beginning and by which humanity is to survive extinction. Homosex, transvestism, and bestiality represent denial of divine authority. The Triune God has a purpose for each person. Rebellion against His purpose brings gradual loss of the divine image. Therefore, those who oppose His authority are to be pitied and humble intercession offered for them.

The spilling of human semen (onanism) was regarded as an unrighteous act because this violates the divinely established order in creation. The seed that should fall to the earth is the seed of the plants with roots in the earth. The seed of man should fall on his own type (the womb), from which man comes forth. In 191 A.D., Clement of Alexandria wrote, “Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted.” (The Instruction of Children)

The prohibition against onanism reflects the ancient wisdom that was informed by observation of patterns in nature. It is based on reality, not imagined entities or moral relativism. Dr. David C. Innes of King’s College in New York City, recently wrote, “Living in reality also means living in principled awareness of who is in charge of all things and thus living in recognition of what is true.”

The hedge extended even to the sowing of seed and to textiles. The Hebrew were not to sow two types of seed in the same field or weave cloth using two different types of fiber.

Such prohibitions sound strange to people today. They are seen as baseless religious restrictions. Some reject binary reasoning entirely though it is the logical outcome of empirical observations of the order of creation. Though the world casts Bible believers are naive or stupid, binary reasoning is the basis for great complexity of thought. Consider the complexity of Artificial Intelligence and advanced computation. Both are driven by binary code. Consider also how the diversity of organisms in the Cambrian Explosion is characterized by the emergence of binary and symmetrical features. In the Precambrian organisms we find neither bilateral symmetry nor any bivalves. The greater diversity and complexity of organisms coincided with the appearance of binary features in the fossil record.

Related reading: Orthodoxy Requires Binary Reasoning; STEM Education: Theories About the Cambrian Explosion; Philosophers' Corner: Two Types of Binary Reasoning; A Christian Anthropologist Considers Gender in the Bible; Male and Female are Primary in Hebrew Scriptures; Territorial Ambitions of the Early Hebrew

The Land of Kain and His Descendants

 

Photo credit: Anni Vahlqvist

"And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the Land of Nod, on the east of Eden" (Gen. 4:16, KJV).

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Hebrew phrase "east of Eden" is quimat-Eden and appears to be a Nilotic reference to a fertile plain with bulrushes. The Ancient Egyptian word for bulrushes is qma. Perhaps the biblical writer has Mesopotamia in mind. The term Eden derives from the Akkadian term edinu, which refers to a fertile plain and describes the region between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. If Cain went to reside east of Mesopotamia, he would have been in Pakistan.

Identifying where Kain went is difficult because Eden extended from the Upper Nile Valley to the great rivers of Mesopotamia. The Bible describes Eden as a vast well-watered territory that extended from the sources of the Nile in Uganda and Ethiopia to the Tigris and Euphrates. In Genesis 2, one of the rivers on the southern border of Eden is called the Gihon (meaning "gushing"). The Ethiopians identify the Gihon with the Abay River. The Pishon is also associated with the Nile Valley because it "skirts the whole land of Havilah" (Gen. 2:11). Havilah is the name of one of Kush's sons (Gen. 10:7) and the Kushites lived in the Nile Valley. 

Evidence of the cousin bride's naming prerogative. 

Kain's unnamed daughter married her cousin Enosh 

and named their firstborn son Kenan after her father Kain.

It seems likely that Cain's journey eastward took him out of Africa into Canaan, the land named after him. There he married and built a city which he named after his son, Enoch. Enoch is a royal title.

Canaan is where we find some of Cain's descendants, the Kenites (Gen. 15:18–21; Ex. 3:1; Num. 24:20; Jg. 1:16; Jg. 4:11). The word "Kenite" and the name Kain are related to the land of Canaan, which is כנען, pronounced kena'an. The Kenites were descendants of Tubal Cain who is identified as an early blacksmith in Genesis 4. The Kenite smiths often camped outside of cities where they did their metal work. When Saul came to attack Amalek’s city, he warned the Kenites to move away, saying, “Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites.” (1 Sam. 15:5-6)

The 5100-year fortified Canaanite town of Kinna-ret (Gennesaret) is mentioned by ancient Ugarit scribes and appears to refer to the Kinna people who were called kinah-hu in the Nuzi tablets. This is another explanation for the origin of the word "Canaanite". However, kinah-hu may be related to the names Kain and Kenan. The clans of the early Hebrew brothers Cain and Seth intermarried (caste endogamy). Women descendants of Cain married male descendants of Seth. Genesis 5 lists Kenan as Kain's grandson by his un-named daughter. This is an example of the cousin bride's naming prerogative, a distinctive feature of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the early Hebrew. The name Kenan is a variant of Kain and Ghayin. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (2007) believes that ghayin lies behind the word kinah-hu. In the Canaano-Akkadian, "hu" is a pronominal suffix.

Related reading: Abraham Settled in the Land of Cain; Eden Was a Well-Watered Region

Identifying Strands of the Genesis Narratives

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Genesis is a complex and layered text. Shalom Ratgeizer, an Israeli Bible scholar, notes, “The texts were written by different authors in different times and places in and outside Eretz Israel and were meant for different audiences. The literary styles, languages, and theological ideas are different and at times contradict each other.”

The older material in Genesis pertains to the earliest biblical populations and to the antecedents of the Messianic Faith among Abraham's Hebrew ancestors. Over these older layers are glosses and anachronisms that reflect at least two later sources: the Deuteronomist Historian, and the later hands of Jewish writers. The Deuteronomist writes from the context of the Neo-Babylonian Period, c.700-300 BC, about 1500 years after the time of Abraham. The Jewish insertions reflect even later periods. They date from around 400 B.C. to 200 A.D. The different sources are detected by the contextual incongruities and unraveling the interwoven elements is necessary if we hope to understand the Book of Genesis.

Understanding also requires attention to the anthropologically significant data that highlight contextual incongruities. Consider a Native American chief with a fleet of birch wood canoes controlling trade between villages on the Mississippi in 1720. Fast forward a mere 200 years to 1920 when a river magnate controls commerce on the same river with his fleet of riveted steel ships. Same river, very different cultural contexts.

The cultural contexts of the biblical persons in Genesis 4-12 were as distantly in the past for First Century Jews as they are to most readers today. Adam and Eve lived around 5000-4800 B.C. in a vast well-watered region called Eden. Nimrod, one of their descendants, left Kush (East Africa) and became a city builder in Southern Mesopotamia around 3500 B.C. (Gen. 10). Abraham the Hebrew was one of his descendants.

Abraham's territory extended between Hebron and Beersheba. He also had control of the wells that he dug in Gerar around 2000 B.C. To understand biblical history, we must grapple with the shifts in temporal, spatial, and cultural contexts, and the best disciplines to apply in this effort are cultural anthropology, archaeology, DNA studies, and linguistics.

Critical reading can prevent imposing a presumed or denominational interpretation on the text. The richness of the Genesis narratives is found by tracing the layers and listening for the subordinated voices. Often those are the voices of women.

Discerning the Antecedents

Biblical anthropology asks about antecedents. It explores what comes before what is described in the text. What events preceded the events recounted? It seeks to understand the cultural context of the earliest persons named in Genesis: Adam, Eve, Cain and Seth, etc. It is concerned with ancestors and received traditions. From what earlier context did certain practices develop? What traces of ancient memory can be uncovered?

The biblical text always speaks of something older, some prior action that solicits a response from later generations. The later generations are enjoined to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. There is a thick cultural web surrounding the God of the early biblical Hebrew.

That context is not apparent to the casual reader because it is hidden behind layers of Jewish midrash, denominational interpretations, theological typologies and mythological motifs. The motifs of the tree of life and the serpent are found in many of the world's religions. They are clues as to the lush riverine contexts of the early Hebrew who believed that a woman of their ruler-priest caste would bring forth the Son/Seed of God who would crush the serpent's head (Gen. 3:15). God’s adversary bruises the foot of the Woman’s Son, but the Son crushes his head. That expectation was expressed around 4000 years ago and recorded in Utterance 388 of The Ancient Pyramid Texts: "Horus has shattered (crushed) the mouth of the serpent with the sole of his foot".

Similar references are found in the later Vedic texts. "The Ancient Man danced on the serpent, who still spewed poison from his eyes and hissed loudly in his anger, and he trampled down with his feet whatever head the serpent raised, subduing him calmly as if he were being worshipped with flowers. Kaliya, his umbrella of hoods shattered by the gay dance of death, his limbs broken, vomiting blood copiously from his mouths, remembered the Guru of all who move and are still, the Ancient Man, Narayana, and he surrendered to him in his heart." (Srimad Bhagavatam 10:6, from Andrew Wilson, Ed. World Scriptures, p. 449.) The early Hebrew were a priest caste that believed in God Father and God Son. The Son of God was called HR which means Most High One in ancient Egyptian. The Greeks referred to HR as Horus. In Ancient Egyptian Re means "father."

In the Ancient Pyramid Texts, a priest prays for the King, saying, "Horus is a soul and he recognizes his Father in you..." (Utterance 423)

In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Horus is called the "advocate of his Father" (cf. 1 John 2:1), and all the gods are said to be "in the train of Horus." Here we find the language of a royal procession such as this: "When He ascended on high, He led captives in his train, and gave gifts to men.” (Eph. 4:8).

Biblical anthropology insists that the texts be read objectively and with an eye to extracting data that helps us to understand the earlier contexts. The mythological Adam and Eve are posed as the first parents (apical ancestors). This is consistent with many African origin stories. Among the Gikuyu, the first man and women were called Gikuyu and Mumbi. However, these are not the first humans on earth, but the founders of the Gikuyu people. Likewise, Adam and Eve are the founders of the clans that come to be identified as Horite and Sethite Hebrew. These were Abraham's ancestors.

Abraham is the father of many peoples, an icon of faith, and a "sent away son" to whom God delivered a territory in ancient Edom. The sending away of non-ascendant sons is a feature of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the biblical Hebrew. That feature drove the Hebrew dispersion out of Africa and the spread of the primitive Messianic Faith that came to be known as "Christianity".

Related reading: The Substance of Abraham's Faith; Three Portraits of Adam; The Hebrew were a Caste; Horite and Sethite Mounds; What Abraham Discovered on Mt. Moriah; The Hebrew Selection of Marriage Partners

Was Tamar Judah's Wife?

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Tamar is usually presented as a Canaanite woman with no Hebrew ancestry. This is clearly not the case because the Hebrew took only Hebrew marriage partners (caste endogamy). It is more likely that Tamar was a daughter of a Hebrew priest who maintained a water shrine along the road between Adullam and Timnah and that she was a shrine-dedicated virgin before her marriage. She was qedeshah, that is a holy woman. Judah’s friend Hirah went to find Tamar, asking for the qedeshah (Gen. 38:21).

Concerning such women, Bible scholar Edward Lipinski noted, “Contrary to the claims of some 20th-century scholarship, the Hebrew Bible never refers directly to cult prostitutes. Many modern Bible translations are simply misleading in this respect. Much of the confusion results from a misunderstanding of a few Biblical texts that mention qedeshot, the plural of qedeshah, which is related to qodesh, “holy place.”

In his “Akkadian Lexical Companion for Biblical Hebrew” Hayim Tawil notes that qedeshah or kedeshah is derived from the root K-D-Sh which can mean “separation” or “elevation” of a holy woman. It can refer to a woman dedicated to the service of a temple or a water shrine.

If we remove the narrative about Judah’s sons Er and Onan we are left with a coherent picture of Judah as a Hebrew clan chief with two wives. One wife was the daughter of a Hebrew man named Shua and the other, mentioned in rabbinic writings, was either the daughter of Asuel (or Bat-Asuel) or, if one credits the Book of Jubilees (34:20), a woman named Aliyah. High-ranking Hebrew chiefs typically had two wives living in separate settlements.

It is strange that the Bible provides so little information about someone as prominent as Judah. Afterall, the words Jew and Judea are derived from his name. Judah was a Hebrew chief who, by the time of the events described in Genesis 38, would have been an older man with two wives. Tamar was probably one of them. The detail about God killing Judah’s sons seems to come from the Deuteronomistic Historian, a source from about 1000 years after the time of Judah and Tamar. The narrative reflects the legal and theological frameworks of the Deuteronomistic history, the taboo of onanism, and the practice of levirate marriage as codified in Deuteronomy 25:5–10. The theology of the Deuteronomist entails a God who directly punishes and sometimes ends the lives of those who violate the Law.

When we extract this source from the picture Judah emerges as the father of three living sons: Shelah, Perez, and Zerah by two different wives. These Hebrew sons form a typical three-clan confederation. It was common for the descendants of two of the sons of a confederation to intermarry. The intermarriage between the descendants of Zerah and Perez explains why they are linked in the Book of Ruth and counted among the ancestors of King David and Jesus.

Typically, the Bible traces descent from two half-brothers and their wives. Consider these sibling sets in which a common father is acknowledged, but there are at least two different mothers.

Jubal, Jabal, Tubal-Cain – Lamech’s sons by two wives (Gen. 4).

Ham, Shem, Japheth – Noah’s sons by different women.

Nahor, Abraham, Haran – Terah’s sons by two wives.

Isaac, Joktan, Ishmael - Abraham’s sons by two wives and a concubine.

Moses, Aaron, Korah – Amram’s sons by two wives.

Numbers 26:20 explicitly identifies the three-clan confederation of Judah. “The descendants of Judah by their clans were: through Shelah, the Shelanite clan; through Perez, the Perezite clan; through Zerah, the Zerahite clan.”

Typically, only two of the three sons of a Hebrew confederation are ascendant, meaning that their roles as firstborn sons are prescribed. The firstborn of the first wife is his father’s heir and when the father dies, he rules over the father’s territory. The firstborn of the second wife serves the household of his maternal grandfather or becomes an official in that territory. The third is a son of a concubine and he is sent away with sufficient resources to become established in an area away from the two other sons. This custom drove the dispersion of the early Hebrew into far reaches on the ancient world.

Evidence that Judah married Tamar

Around the time that Joseph was serving his uncle Potiphar in Egypt, Judah left Hebron and went to Timnah for a sheep shearing with his Hebrew kinsmen Hirah of Abdullum. On the way, Judah stopped at Enaim where he married Tamar. The priest overseer of the Enaim water shrine was Tamar’s father.

Enaim means “Two Wells” and it was common for marriages to be formalized at such places. Abraham married Keturah who lived at the Well of Sheba (Beersheba). Moses married Zipporah who he met at the well of her father Jethro. Caesarius Archbishop of Arles explained that Isaac, Jacob, and Moses are types of Jesus Christ, "for this reason they found their wives at wells, because Christ was to find His church at the waters of baptism."

Note that when Judah arrived with a gift for his bride, she was veiled. This was a common practice. In Genesis 24:65 we read that Rebekah covered her face with a veil when she learned that the man walking toward them in the field was her future husband, Isaac.

Note also that Judah gave Tamar a kid from his flock and promised her a goat. This sounds very much like a bride price.

Related reading: The Hebrew were a Caste; The Hebrew Selection of Marriage Partners; Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; Keturah was Abraham's Second Wife; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew; The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons; Fertility and Water Shrines

The Ram of God has been Provided

 

Connecting the Genesis 10 data with the Genesis 11 data.

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The beliefs of the early Hebrew concerning the Son of God are reflected in their solar symbolism. They pictured the Son of God rising with the sun as a lamb and setting in the west as a ram. As they ascended Mount Moriah, Isaac asked his father "where is the lamb" for the sacrifice? Abraham replied that God would provide the lamb, but God provided a ram instead.

The Son of God often was shown riding with the Father on the celestial Sun boat. The boat of the morning hours was called Mandjet and the boat of the evening hours was called Mesektet. While the Son was on the Mandjet, he was depicted as a lamb. While on the Mesektet, he was a ram. Abraham would have understood the message of the ram provided by God on Mount Moriah, and he believed the promise, and believing, he was justified. We if don’t get hung up on chronological time, which does not pertain to God, we will see that the ground for justification is the same for all people throughout all human existence. 

The Son of God was called the “Lamb” in his weaker (kenotic) state, and he was called the “Ram” in his glorified state. The solar arc spoke of the Son’s death and resurrection. It spoke of a future Righteous Ruler who would overcome death and lead his people to immortality. This is what Jesus meant when he told the Jews, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56)

The Genesis data shown in the diagram above reveals that Abraham was a descendant of both Ham and Shem because their lines intermarried. This is an example of caste endogamy. The Hebrew were a caste of ruler-priests. They were organized into 2 ritual groups (moieties): the Horite Hebrew and the Sethite Hebrew. A great deal is known about both groups from texts and prayers that they wrote on the walls of royal tombs in the Nile Valley. Those have been translated and collected in a volume titled “Ancient Pyramid Texts”. Some of the prayers date as early as 6200 years ago. Most date to around 4200 years ago, closer to the time of Abraham.

It is clear in The Ancient Pyramid Texts that the Horites and the Sethites maintained separate settlements. Utterance 308 addresses them as separate: "Hail to you, Horus in the Horite Mounds! Hail to you, Horus in the Sethite Mounds!"

Though separate groups or moieties, the Horite and Sethite Hebrew shared common religious practices and beliefs. They worshiped the same God whose symbol was the Sun, and they served the same king. However, the Horite temples and shrines were more prestigious. Utterance 470 strikes a contrast between the Horite and Sethite mounds and designates the Horite mounds as "the High Mounds."

Figures relating to both Seth and Horus have been found at Nekhen on the Nile, the oldest known site of Horite Hebrew worship (4000 B.C.). This figurine of Seth as a red man with the head of a hippo was found at Nekhen. A gold figure of HR (Horus in Greek) as a falcon was also found at Nekhen. The hippo was the totem of the Sethite Hebrew, and the golden falcon was the totem of the Horite Hebrew.

Among the early Hebrew green malachite was associated with HR and represented new life and the hope of resurrection. The Egyptian Book of the Dead speaks of how the deceased will become a falcon "whose wings are of green stone" (chapter 77). The Ancient Pyramid Texts speak of Horus as the "Lord of the green stone" (Utterance 301) and the land of the blessed dead was described as the "field of malachite."

Note that these prayers are written in hope that the buried king might rise to new life. In his resurrection body he is to restore his settlements and cities, and open the door to the Westerners, Easterners, Northerners and Southerners (Pt Utterance 587). He is to rule over the peoples, restore the former state of blessedness, and unite heaven and earth. The early Messianic expectation was expressed in Utterance 388 of The Pyramid Texts: "Horus has shattered the mouth of the serpent with the sole of his foot". In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, HR is called the "advocate of his father" (cf. 1 John 2: 1).

When seen from this perspective, the early Hebrew religion appears to be the foundation of the Messianic hope that is fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, a direct descendant of the Hebrew ruler-priests.

The New Testament speaks about Jesus as the firstborn from the grave and by his resurrection He delivers to the Father a "peculiar people." He leads us to the Father where we receive heavenly recognition because we belong to Him. Here we find the language of a royal procession: "When He ascended on high, He led captives in his train and gave gifts to men.” 

Paul continues in Ephesians 4:8-10.

What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the depths of the earth? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.

A Horite Hebrew song found at the royal complex at Ugarit, speaks of the Son's descent to the place of the dead "to announce good tidings." The text reads: Hr ešeni timerri duri - "Horus below in the dark netherworld" and has the phrase Šanizzin ḫalukan ḫalzi - "to announce good tidings." (See Note 2 on page 2012.)

The early Hebrew expected the Righteous Ruler to rise on the third day. Utterance 667 says: "Oh Horus, this hour of the morning, of this third day is come, when thou surely passeth on to heaven, together with the stars, the imperishable stars."

Heavenly recognition for the early Hebrew was never an individual prospect. Heavenly recognition came to the people through the righteousness of the ruler-priest. Some early Hebrew rulers took this seriously and the worst were so earthy minded that they shed much blood enlarging their territories. All failed to be the Ruler-Priest who rose from the dead. None had the power to deliver captives from the grave and to lead them to the Father in heaven (Ps. 68:18; Ps. 7:7; Eph. 4:8). That would be fulfilled by Jesus, the Son of God, and this was revealed to Abraham on Mount Moriah.

Related reading: The Hebrew Were a Caste; What Abraham Discovered on Mount Moriah; The Faith of the Early Hebrew Delivered to Us; The Religious Symbolism of Green Malachite; Competition Between the Horites and the Sethites

The Hebrew Selection of Marriage Partners

Newlywed Christian Bedouins

Beirut, 1923

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Hebrew ruler-priests selected marriage partners only from their widely dispersed caste members. Hebrew marriages were arranged to the benefit of the households of both the bride and the groom. Matches were not based on romantic love. Deliberation about suitable partners were conducted under the authority of the fathers, village elders, clan chiefs, and sometimes the king. The king of Egypt arranged the marriage of Asenath to Joseph, Jacob’s sent-away son. Asenath was the daughter of a high-ranking priest of Heliopolis (Gen. 41:45). This is an example of caste endogamy because both Asenath and Jacob were Hebrew.

The selection of marriage partners took into consideration political alliances, distribution of wealth, and the necessity of heirs. Some marriages served to raise the status of a family. There were many potential matches because there were many Hebrew clans other than Jacob’s clan (the Israelites). Priority was given to marriages within the three-clan Hebrew confederations such as Ham, Shem and Japheth, or Og, Gog and Magog, or Huz, Buz and Uz.

It seems that in Abraham’s time, deliberation about marriage partners involved a modular system with a cycle of between 9 and 12 possible matches. In this system, X represents a firstborn son, and the possible matches are between 9 and 12 blood related females, drawn from the three clans of the confederation, and considered in a fixed order of rotation.

A bride selected from the pool of possible females within the confederation typically would be a half-sister in the case of the ruler’s first marriage and a patrilineal cousin in the case of the second marriage. The bride for the next male in the Hebrew hierarchy of sons would be considered in the rotation, beginning with the next female in the rotation after the last match was made.

The numbers 9 -12 are based on the evidence that the early Hebrew had a military organization of 3 clans: my clan, my brother’s clan, and my cousin’s clan. This narrowed the pool from which a consanguine bride could be chosen. This is a method of exclusion.

A similar way of excluding potential marriage partners is found among Hindus who practice clan exogamy. Marriage is prohibited between members of clans with the same totem. The most common totems are those of animals regarded as sacred, such as the tiger, the cobra, the calf, and the elephant. Totems of Hindu clans can also be trees and other plants.

Animal totems are evident in the names of the Horite Hebrew listed in Genesis 36. These include Zibeon (the hyena), the father of Anah (the wild donkey), Aiah (the kite), Dishan (the gazelle), the father of Aran (the wild goat), and Akan (the roe), the son of Ezer. Totemic names include Cheran (the lamb) and Shobal (the young lion). The role played by the early Hebrew totemic organization has yet to be clarified. However, it is evident that the totems played a role in alliances by marriage, both by inclusion and exclusion.

It is possible that the account of Laban's insistence that the older sister (Leah) must marry before the younger (Rachel) alludes to a modular system. Jacob, who was sent to live with his maternal uncle, agreed to work for Laban for seven years in return for marriage to his youngest daughter Rachel. However, on their wedding night, Laban switched Leah for Rachel. Laban claimed that in his country it is not permitted to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one (Gen. 29:16-30).

Here a late hand on the text would have us believe that the marriage customs of the Hebrew in Paddan-Aram were different than the Hebrew customs in Jacob’s homeland in Edom. However, the biblical data revels that the early Hebrew consistently adhered to the same marriage and ascendancy pattern with its hierarchy of sons and daughters regardless of where they lived. Firstborn sons of ruling wives ranked at the top, followed by the firstborn sons of high-status concubines. High-status Hebrew daughters, such as the never-mentioned daughters of Abraham, would have been married to high-ranking Hebrew rulers, priests and clan chiefs.

Related reading: The Hebrew were a Caste; The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons; Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; Totemism - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia; Using Totems to Trace Ancestry and Marriage Ties; Keturah was Abraham's Second Wife

Thankful for Faithful Followers!

 

I'm dropping a line here to thank the readers of this blog. I appreciate you!

Feel free to post comments. I enjoy reading them and I try to respond to all of them.

Many who follow this blog also follow Biblical Anthropology, another of my blogs. If you have never visited that blog, I invite you to do so.

INDEX of topics at Biblical Anthropology 

Again, thank you for reading, and keep the comments coming.

Alice C. Linsley

Examples of the Cousin Bride's Naming Prerogative

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Hebrew men who ruled over territories maintained two wives in geographically separate settlements. The wife of the ruler’s youth was usually a half-sister, as was Sarah to Abraham. The ruler’s second wife was usually a patrilineal cousin, as was Keturah to Abraham. The second marriage came much later than the first marriage. 

Biblical examples of the cousin bride naming her firstborn son after her father include Lamech the Younger (Gen. 5) who was named after his maternal grandfather Lamech the Elder (Gen. 4) and Terah’s son Haran, who was named after his maternal grandfather, a ruler of Haran where Terah died (Gen. 11:32).

Nimrod’s firstborn son by his cousin was named Asshur after his maternal grandfather. The repetition of the names Lamech, Asshur, Joktan, and Sheba in the biblical king lists is evidence of the cousin bride’s naming prerogative, a distinctive feature of the Hebrew marriage and ascendancy pattern.

Another example involves the title Korah which refers to a ritually shaved priest. There are at least 4 men in the Bible named Korah. Some "Sons of Korah" wrote several Psalms. Korah, the son of Esau and Oholibamah, probably was the father of Ishara, Amram's cousin wife. Note that she gave the title to her firstborn son. Korah and Moses were half-brothers. 

Related reading: Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; The Wives' Settlements Mark the Boundaries; The Pattern of Two Wives; Keturah was Abraham's Second Wife; BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Hebrew Names and Titles

Priest-Astronomers of the Ancient World

The Milky Way seen through the pylons of the Temple at Karnak.

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Temples in the ancient Fertile Cresent were constructed by rulers. These were grand edifices meant to display the wealth and power of the ruler. They were constructed at major water sources such as the Euphrates, the Tigris, or the Nile.

The temples in Egypt and Babylon were aligned with celestial bodies to synchronize religious rituals and agricultural cycles. Temples were observatories where priests recorded the movements of the Sun, Moon, and five "wandering stars" (planets) to determine when to plant and when to hold religious festivals. The astronomer priests took their responsibility to fix the dates for feasts and fasts seriously because they believed that the pattern for right living on earth was found in the God-established pattern found in the heavens.

The Babylonian temples had seven tiers representing the number of visible celestial bodies: Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn. The architecture was intended to express a celestial reality on earth. The temple became the archetype of the heavens above, a common architectural custom of ancient populations as Mircea Eliade demonstrated in his book The Sacred and the Profane.

In the temple dedicated to the Sun in Upper Egypt, at the ruins of Babian, there were seven urns. These represented the seven visible celestial bodies after which the days of the week are named in many languages (e.g. Monday - moon day in English, lunes - moon day in Spanish.)

The Temple dedicated to the High God (Amun-Re) at Karnak was aligned with the winter solstice sunrise so that on that day, a beam of light traveled through the massive pylons and illuminated the inner sanctuary. In Ancient Egyptian the word Re means "father". 

By 4245 B.C. the priests of the Upper Nile had already established a calendar based on the appearance of the star Sirius that becomes visible to the naked eye once every 1,461 years. Apparently, priests of the Ancient Nile Valley had been tracking this star and connecting it to seasonal changes and agriculture for thousands of years. The priest Manetho reported in his history (241 B.C.) that the Nilotes had been “star-gazing” as early as 40,000 years ago. Plato, who studied for 13 years in Egypt, claimed that the Africans had been tracking the heavens for 10,000 years.

Blessings and Curses from Above

In the ancient world, the celestial bodies were sometimes depicted as bowls from which curses and blessings were poured out on the earth. The worst possible curse involved seven bowls or a seven-fold pouring. Cursing or "incantation bowls" such as the one shown above have been found in Mesopotamia and Egypt. This cursing bowl dates to c.3000 B.C.

Even today, we speak of blessings coming down from heaven. James speaks of every good gift coming down from the Father of lights.

The best possible blessing involved a seven-fold pouring such as happens in the Agharias marriage ceremony (Orissa, India). It begins with the bride’s father delivering to the bride a bracelet (as did Abraham's servant to Rebekah) and seven small earthen bowls. The bride is seated in the open, and seven women hold the bowls over her head one above the other. Water is then poured from one bowl into the other, each being filled in turn and the whole finally falling on the bride's head. Pouring the water from above represents the heavenly blessing. The bride is then bathed and carried in a basket seven times round the marriage-post. Then she is seated and seven women place their heads round her while a male relative winds a thread seven times round the women.

Related reading: Curses in Genesis; BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: The Seven Bowls of Revelation 16; Shrines, Temples, and Synagogues; Seven Planets, Seven Bowls; STEM Education: Priests of the Ancient World Studied Astronomy

Christ Descended to the Dead

 

Matthew testifies that the Jewish authorities insisted that the tomb be secured, the stone sealed and a guard set (Matthew 27:66). They did this because the Jews feared that Jesus' followers would remove his body and declare that He had risen.

The Roman seal was a cord that stretched across the stone. It was fastened at each end with sealing clay. It was a capital offense for unauthorized persons to break the seal. Very early on the morning of the first day, this seal was broken and the tomb was found empty.

However, even in his repose Jesus Christ was declaring the power of God. On Holy Saturday, Jesus entered the place that only the highest authority could enter. He declared his victory over death in Sheol, the place of repose for the righteous. The word is derived from the ancient Egyptian word Sheut (šwt), meaning shadow. The Egyptians believed that something of the dead person continues as a shadow beyond death. In quietness Christ broke down the bars of death, our ultimate enemy.

While his body was still in the tomb, Christ declared good news to those in the place of the dead. A Horite Hebrew song found at the royal complex at Ugarit, speaks of the Son's descent to the place of the dead "to announce good tidings." The text reads: Hr ešeni timerri duri - "Horus below in the dark netherworld" and has the phrase Šanizzin ḫalukan ḫalzi - "to announce good tidings." (See Note 2 on page 2012.)

In the Apostles' Creed, Christians proclaim this reality: "he descended to the dead/hell". There Christ our God declared glad tidings to the faithful who died before him and confirmed his triumph over death.

Related reading: BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Signs Given That We Might Believe; Christ has Risen as Foretold

Just Genesis Celebrates 19 Years!

 

The average lifespan of a blog is 33 months. Today JUST GENESIS celebrates 19 years! Testimonials about her research can be found here: Alice C. Linsley's Genesis Research

19 years is a remarkable accomplishment and a testament to the loyalty of readers and followers. You are what matters! Your questions, observations, comments and critiques make this an exceptional blog. 

I am very thankful for your participation!

If the content at JUST GENESIS interests you, check out my other blog Biblical Anthropology. That blog has been active for 15 years!

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Allegory of Two Wives

 

Lamech the Elder and his 2 wives. Lamech was an early Hebrew ruler.

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Hebrew rulers who controlled territories and water systems had two wives. The separate settlements of the wives marked territorial boundaries of the ruler’s kingdom. This feature of the Hebrew social structure sheds light on the relationship of the faithful among the Hebrew (before Judaism) and the faithful among the people who identify as Christians.

The Apostle Paul draws on the Hebrew social structure to contrast Judaism with the core Christian belief that the gift of salvation is embraced by faith in God's promises. In Galatians 4:21-31, Paul uses the story of Sarah and Hagar to illustrate the difference between salvation by grace through faith in Christ and the Jewish emphasis on salvation through obedience to the law. Sarah's son Isaac is portrayed as the child of promise, while Hagar's son Ishmael is portrayed as a slave to the law.

In Paul's context, the allegory makes sense. He was an apologist for the Messianic Faith that was fulfilled in Jesus Christ. He insisted that only those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God who came to save sinners can receive the promise of salvation. Paul was arguing with Jews who had rejected Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. 

Paul also states that those who would be saved must be grafted into the faith of Abraham. Abraham and his Hebrew ancestors believed in God Father and God Son. They also believed in bodily resurrection and looked for a righteous ruler who would overcome death and rise on the third day. The earliest known resurrection texts were prayers offered by Nilotic Hebrew priests for their deceased rulers.

Paul contrasts Sarah, Abraham's principal wife and Hagar, a concubine. His allegory involves two women of unequal social status. Yet another allegory should involve Abraham's two wives, Sarah and Keturah. Both were Hebrew women who held to the faith of their Hebrew ancestors. Sarah was the wife of Abraham's youth and Keturah was the wife of Abraham's old age. Abraham had 9 sons and an unknown number of daughters by 2 wives and 2 concubines (Hagar and Mesek).

Sarah was Abraham's half-sister and Keturah was Abraham's patrilineal cousin. These two Hebrew wives pose an allegory of the relationship of the people of faith who lived in anticipation of the Son's appearing and those who lived after the Son's appearing. Sarah came first and Keturah came much later, but both were women of the Hebrew faith. In other words, as 2 wives made a kingdom for Abraham, so the kingdom of God is comprised of 2 wives. One does not outrank the other or supplant the other. We are not speaking of Israel and the Church. Instead, the allegory to 2 wives represents the faithful justified who believed God's promise concerning the Son yet to appear and the faithful justified who love and obey the Son Incarnate. 

The social structure of the biblical Hebrew tells us much about the relationship between the two households of faith. Together they constitute a kingdom. There is no reason to subsume one household of faith to the other. They are equal in God's kingdom.

Related reading: Abraham's Sons; BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Sovereignty and Two Wives; The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons; Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; The Wives' Settlements Mark the Boundaries

Misunderstanding the Priesthood

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Recent posts and videos by Anglican evangelicals such as Allison Barr have presented flawed arguments for the ordination of women to the priesthood. Their views represent a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the priesthood. The priesthood is and always has been about the Blood. 

Blood is essential for life. Blood bonds are the strongest of all kinship bonds. Blood purifies. It is the basis of all biblical covenants. It redeems. In other words, the priesthood speaks of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as no other sacred or secular office can.

Anthropologists have noted that almost universally blood is gendered. That is, the blood work of males and the blood work of females is distinct. The blood work of males pertains to war, hunting and execution. The blood work of females pertains to the monthly cycle and childbirth. The two can never be in the same space. They are never to be confused or mixed. Men were never allowed in the birthing chambers and women were never allowed in the place of animal sacrifice.

God wants us to think clearly about life and death. "Choose this day life or death" (Deut. 30:19) is a powerful exhortation to think about the distinction between life and death. That is why the people were commanded never to boil a baby goat in its mother's sustaining milk (Ex. 23:19, Ex. 34:26, and Deut. 14:21). This action blurs the distinction between life and death.

The priesthood is uniquely about the Blood of Jesus Messiah. No wonder it is constantly under attack.

Where the Messianic Narrative Gets Lost

 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Genesis, the first book of the Bible, provides the data shown in the diagram. The science of Biblical Anthropology draws its data from the 66 canonical books of the Bible and regards books such as Jasher to be of secondary importance because of their late dates. Jasher (Sefer haYashar) belongs to the Jewish literature known as Midrash and dates to the Middle Ages. Such late rabbinic writings reflect the theology and historical narrative of Judaism which did not exist when Abraham and his ancestors lived. The people shown in the diagram above were all Hebrew. None were Jewish.

Abraham's father was Tera (Terah). The word means "priest", and it is found among Abraham's Hebrew ancestors, some of whom lived in the Nile Valley. The word is found among the rulers of the Nilotic Anu. The title "Tera-netjer" is shown on this tile found by the famous archaeologist Flinders Petrie. Tera-netjer means "priest of God/King".

A Sethite Hebrew priest at a temple of the ruler Heth among the cities of the Nilotic Anu.

Among the Nilotic Luo, Ja'ter refers to the priest who performs the widow cleansing rituals. Among the Dinka of East Africa, the word for priest is tier. The root of these words is TR, the same as appears in the original Hebrew which had no vowels.

In Joshua 24:2 we read: "In olden times, your forefathers – Terah, father of Abraham and father of Nahor – lived beyond the Euphrates and worshiped other gods...". 

Because of this, many assume that Abraham was the first of his family to turn from idol worship to iconoclastic monotheism. However, all of the men named in the diagram above worshipped the same God. They were a priest caste, and castes are united in their religion as well as by blood and marriage ties. 

The Joshua passage also is from a much latter time than the persons about which it speaks. The Joshua narrative rejects the model of monarchic and priestly power held among the early Hebrew (4000-2000 BC). That model defines Messiah's authority. This shift causes readers of the Old Testament to lose sight of the continuity between the Messianic expectation of Abraham's Hebrew ancestors and the later Messianic prophesies of the Old Testament. 

Abraham had 9 sons and all were Hebrew because the Hebrew ruler-priest caste practiced endogamy. Abraham lived c. 1500 years before Judaism emerged as a world religion. He lived c. 2200 years before Islam emerged. This is nonsense: "Abraham’s sons were the ancestors to the lineages from which Judaism and Islam emerged. Isaac, son of Sarah, is forebear of the Jewish people, while Ishmael, son of Hagar, is the ancestor of the Arab people and Prophet Muhammad, anchoring Islamic tradition."

Islam has nothing in common with the faith of Abraham the Hebrew. On the other hand, the Messianic faith that we call "Christianity" is consistent in its core beliefs with the religion of the early Hebrew (4000-2000 BC). See this: The Substance of Abraham's Faith and this: Abraham's Faith Lives in Christianity.

Related reading: Abraham was a Descendant of Nimrod; Why So Many Names For God?; The Hebrew were a Caste; Ancient Words for Priests; Judaism is Not the Faith of Abraham; Jesus and the Horus Narrative

Keturah was a Hebrew Wife

 

Hebron and Beersheba are shown on this map.

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

All Hebrew wives were close kin to their husbands because the Hebrew ruler-priests practiced caste endogamy. Some Hebrew wives were their husband's half-sisters. That is the case with Sarah. She and Abraham had the same father but different mothers. Terah had two wives, as did many of his Hebrew forefathers. It was common for high-ranking Hebrew chiefs to have two wives. 

The half-sister was the bride of the ruler's youth, and the cousin bride was the wife of the ruler's later years. The cousin wife was sought before the Hebrew man took over the rule of his father's territory. This explains Abraham's urgency to fetch a cousin bride for Isaac before he died. Isaac was not Abraham's firstborn son, but as the only son of his half-sister wife, Isaac was Abraham's proper heir. Before he died, Abraham gave grants to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from Isaac (Gen. 25:6). The sending away of non-ascendant sons drove the Hebrew dispersion throughout the Ancient Near East.

Some Hebrew wives were their husbands' cousins. That is the case with Keturah who bore Abraham six sons (Gen. 25). Recognizing this two-wife pattern is essential to understanding the social structure and marriage customs of the early Hebrew. (4000-2000 BC).

The ancient custom of having two wives pertained only to Hebrew men who ruled over territories. The two wives resided in separate settlements that provided security along the ruler's borders. Their border settlements were served by warriors, craftsmen, herdsmen, and physicians. 

Abraham's territory extended between Sarah's settlement at Hebron and Keturah's settlement at Beersheba. These are shown on the map above. Note that Abraham's territory in ancient Edom (Idumea in Greek) does not correspond to the modern Israel.

Keturah’s settlement at Beersheba was the site of seven wells. (Be'er means well.) These wells have been identified by archaeologists. In Abraham’s time, Sarah’s settlement at Hebron had four water sources. It is likely that these wells were also places of ritual cleaning. Shrines were built at wells, and these were tended by priests and their families. The wells provided water for the herds and flocks. Though the water shrines were under the control of regional lords, visitors were welcome to the water. Wells and water shrines were neutral ground and natural gathering places. 

Some Hebrew men met their future wives at wells. Among them were Abraham, Jacob, and Moses. Abraham's servant found Issac's cousin bride at her father's well in Padan-Aram. Jacob met his cousin wife Rebekah at her father's well (Gen. 29). Moses met his cousin wife Zipporah at her father's well in Midian.

The arrangement of the narrative of Sarah's death and burial before the account of Abraham's marriage to Keturah is an artful way to imply that Abraham took a second wife only after Sarah died. However, what is implied is not supported by the biblical data. 

Related reading: Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; Keturah was Abraham's Second Wife; The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew; INDEX of Topics at Just Genesis

The Mysterious Tarim Mummies

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Tarim Basin of Xinjiang, China, with its fertile rim of oases, was home to a homogeneous population living in two settlements about 600 kilometers apart. It is likely that marriage partners were exchanged between the settlements.

The physical features of the Tarim mummies initially suggested that they were Indo-European migrants. Many had high cheekbones and red or blonde hair. However, DNA analysis revealed they were a genetically isolated population descended from Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) who had not mixed with other groups for thousands of years. The Tarim population had remained isolated genetically.

Investigation of their genomic origins found that this population practiced endogamy. Scientists analyzed genome-wide data from thirteen of the earliest known Tarim Basin mummies, dating to between 2,100 and 1,700 B.C., together with five individuals dating to 3,000 - 2,800 B.C. in the neighboring Dzungarian Basin. This first genomic study of prehistoric populations in the Xinjiang Uyghur Region included the earliest yet discovered human remains from the region. The researchers found that the Tarim Basin mummies were direct descendants of a once widespread Pleistocene population that had largely disappeared by the end of the last Ice Age.

Hundreds of mummified bodies have been found in the Tarim Basin. The oldest mummified remains date to about 2000 B.C., the time of Abraham. They are well preserved due to the dry conditions of the Taklamakan Desert. The process of desiccation dramatically slowed decomposition of the bodies and clothing. Some of the burial sites held boat-shaped coffins covered with cattle hides, woven textiles, cheese, grains, and death masks.

“Despite being genetically isolated, the Bronze Age peoples of the Tarim Basin were remarkably culturally cosmopolitan – they built their cuisine around wheat and dairy from the West Asia, millet from East Asia, and medicinal plants like Ephedra from Central Asia,” says Christina Warinner, a senior author of the study, a professor of Anthropology at Harvard University, and a research group leader at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

Below is a photo of one of the Tarim mummies, known as the "Ur-David" mummy or "Cherchen Man" (Chärchän Man). He wore a red twill tunic and leggings. The mummy dates to about 1000 B.C., the time of King David. He had reddish-brown hair and a ginger beard. Note the solar image on his cheek, suggesting that he was a chief. At that time, rulers were believed to be divinely appointed by being overshadowed by the sun, the primary symbol of the High God. A sun pattern on the mummy's face was applied using yellow ochre.

The image on his cheek appears to be a celestial horse., a symbol of the High God. Some burial sites included wooden horse bits and whips, indicating as equestrian culture. The kings of Judah constructed horses at the entrance to the temple in dedication to the sun, the symbol of the High God. (2 Kg. 23:11). Consider 2 Kings 2:11 - "As they [Elijah and Elisha] were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind."

Celtic coin showing the celestial horseman.

Some believe that the first horseman of the Apocalypse who rides a white horse represents Christ.

Joseph Campbell discovered that horse narratives involving a celestial rider are widespread, and often involve a hero who dies and rises, leading his people to victory. Some interpret this as reflecting solar and seasonal changes that mark public occasions such as harvest festivals, solstice celebrations, etc. Campbell considered this a "monomyth" because of the wide distribution of the common elements and themes. However, this belief in a celestial rider who overcomes death may be a glimmer of the Messianic beliefs of the early Hebrew ruler-priests (4000-2000 BC). 

 

Related reading: The surprising origins of the Tarim Basin mummies; The Sun and Celestial Horses; Righteous Rulers and the Resurrection

Abraham was a Descendant of Nimrod

 

The diagram shows another example of the cousin bride's naming prerogative, a distinctive feature of the early Hebrew marriage and ascendancy pattern. Nimrod's Mesopotamian wife was a cousin and a princess. She named their firstborn son Asshur after her father. 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The so-called “begats” are king lists that predate the Sumerian King Lists by at least 1500 years. To gain a clearer understanding of the influence and authority of these early Hebrew rulers we must consider Genesis chapter 10. Here we are told that Nimrod was a son of Kush, a Hebrew ruler in the Nile region. That is where the oldest known site of Hebrew worship was located at Nekhen.

Nimrod became a high-ranking Hebrew official in Sumer and later in Mesopotamia. He is known for his expansive building projects in Shinar, a region of independent city-states as early as 4100 B.C. Eridu (Eredo) was the earliest known city in Sumeria. The Sumerian King Lists describes Eridu as the “city of the first kings”, stating, “After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingship was in Eridu”.

Later Nimrod began building projects in Northern Mesopotamia which is referred to as “Assyria”. Genesis 10:11 states that Nimrod went into the territory of Asshur or Assyria. The words Asshur and Assyria are the same in Hebrew. Asshur the Younger had a brother named Arpachshad. Among Arpachshad’s descendants are Eber, Peleg, Joktan, Nahor, Terah, and Abraham (Gen. 11:10-33).

This diagram shows another example of the cousin bride's naming prerogative. Lamech the Elder's daughter Naamah named her firstborn son Lamech after her father. She married her patrilineal cousin Methuselah. 

Related reading: Nimrod's Mesopotamian Wife; Why Nekhen is Anthropologically Significant; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew; The Cousin Bride's Naming Prerogative