Isaac's Three Sons

Alice C. Linsley

When I was in seminary, my Old Testament professor told the class that he doubted Isaac’s existence because there is so little information about Isaac. He noted that the story of Isaac pretending that Rebekah was his sister parallels the story of Abraham asking Sarah to say that she is his sister. He concluded that Isaac is a literary construction reflecting the author’s love of narrative doublets, duplicates of the same event believed by critics to be told by two different sources.

While I appreciate this professor’s observations, I disagree with his conclusion. Isaac’s historicity can be verified by analysis of the Hebrew kinship pattern. Kinship patterns as complex as that of the early Hebrew are not found with fictional characters. Further, the kinship pattern of Abraham's people reveals a good deal of information about the principal figures of Genesis.

According to the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the early Hebrew, Isaac was Abraham's proper heir because he was the firstborn (only) son of Abraham's principal wife, his half-sister bride, Sarah. When Abraham died, Isaac became the ruler over Abraham's territory which extended on a north-south axis between Hebron and Beersheba (shown on this map).

After the binding of Isaac, Abraham and Isaac were living in Beersheba, and it was to the region of Beersheba in the Negev (Gen. 24:62) that Abraham’s servant brought Rebekah to meet her betrothed. 

Beersheba was the settlement of Abraham’s cousin wife, Keturah. Isaac probably had already married his first wife, a half-sister. That wife was a daughter of Abraham and Keturah. By his first wife Isaac had sons and daughters who became the marriage partners of the sons and daughters born to Isaac by Rebekah. All of these persons were Hebrew and the Hebrew were a ruler-priest caste that practiced endogamy.

The kinship pattern of the early Hebrew provides the essential information to draw this conclusion and to justify it on the basis of the text alone.

It is possible to trace some of Isaac's children by his first wife through the cousin bride’s naming prerogative. Rebekah’s father was Bethuel (Gen. 22:23), a son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother. Why didn’t she name her firstborn son Bethuel after her father? This is the pattern for those who were to rule. We are given this explanation: Jacob grasped his twin brother’s heel as he was born (Gen. 25:26) “so his name was called Jacob.” It is also possible that Rebecca didn’t name her first-born son after Bethuel because this son was not the one who would rule after Isaac’s death. Isaac's proper heir according to the Hebrew marriage and ascendancy pattern was Esau.

Rebecca is central to Isaac’s claim as the heir to Abraham’s territory and to the divine promises, yet she did not name her firstborn son after her father, as was the practice for the sons of cousin brides who were to be rulers in the territories of their maternal grandfathers. This suggests that Isaac had another firstborn son by another wife. His proper heir was the firstborn son of his first wife, a daughter of Keturah.

Tracking Firstborn Sons

How do we track Isaac’s first-born by his other wife? We must look for the hidden third son, which involves looking for linguistic similarity as in the case of Og, Magog and Gog. When we do this, we find three sons of Abraham: Yitzak (Isaac) by Sarah; Yishmael (Ishmael) by Hagar, and Yishbak (Ishbak) by Keturah. We note the parallel names and Yitz and Yish, which recall the 3-son confederations of the ancient Kushite rulers.

Yishbak the elder would have had a grandson name Yishbak. This younger Yishbak is the first-born of Isaac by a daughter of Yishbak. She named their first-born son Yishbak after her father, according to the naming prerogative of the cousin bride.

Yishbak’s name means he will leave, indicating that he was a sent-away son. He is likely one of the sons to whom Abraham gave gifts before sending them away to the east (Gen. 25:6). Yishbak’s descendants lived in the lands to the east of Canaan. Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch identified the name Ishbak with Iasbuk found on cuneiform inscriptions from a land whose king was allied with Sangara of Gargamis (Carchemish) against Assur-nazir-pal and Shalmaneser II (c. 859 B.C.). This Ishbak or Yisbak was likely a descendant of Abraham and Isaac.

It is fairly safe to conclude that Isaac had at least three sons and their names were: Jacob, Esau and Yishbak, the last being named by the cousin bride after her father, according to the cousin bride's naming prerogative. All three appear to have been rulers over their own territories.

Related reading: The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons; The Hebrew Were a Caste; Terah's Two Wives; Moses' Two Wives; Three-Clan Confederations of the Bible; Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives

NOTE

This pattern is like that of the Kushite rulers. The Kushite ruler Piye united Nubia and Egypt and established the 25th Dynasty. Before his death, Piye divided his kingdom between his 3 first-born sons, whose names are linguistically similar. Sheba-qo ruled in Thebes, Shebit-qo ruled in Napata, and Ta-har-qo ruled in Memphis. Shebaqo revived the office of high priest, which he awarded to his son Hori-makhet who was high priest in Thebes.

Adam and Eve as Meta-Historical Ancestors

Alice C. Linsley

This essay should be read along with this essay: Are Adam and Eve Real?

In this short entry we explore the nature of the biblical figures Adam, Eve and their relationship. I believe that Adam and Eve are archetypal ancestors, or meta-historical figures, who represent the first created couple. In this sense they represent something true and real, but the Biblical details that pertain to them should not be taken as history.

Archetypes in the ancient world were regarded as real in the Platonic sense. Plato, who studied for 13 years in Egypt, likely borrowed the concept of Forms or Archetypes from the ancient Egyptians.

Whether taken as historical or meta-historical, Adam and Eve represent the first created humans in the Bible. Since the oldest human fossils are about 3.4 million years old, we would have to place Adam and Eve back at least that far, if they are historical. If they are meta-historical it would be futile to attach a time period to them. Either interpretation leads to the conclusion that these were the ancestors of the Genesis Kings and the Mighty Men of Old.

Archbishop James Ussher believed Adam and Eve were historical and he attempted to calculate the age of the Earth using the generations listed in Genesis. Ussher failed to recognize that these lists are not generational. They are regnal, that is to say, they can't be used to count generations because they are king lists and some kings ruled simultaneously, others ruled for short periods, and still others ruled for longer than a generation (40 years).

Most of the rulers had two wives so there were two first born sons. Ussher didn't take this into consideration, which is another reason his chronology cannot be used to determine the age of the Earth. The children of the first wife (a half-sister) were born when the royal heir was a young man. The children of the second wife (a patrilineal cousin or niece) were born after than heir had ascended to the throne. Typically, there was a span of about 30 years between the two marriages.

In fact, the first verifiably historical persons in Genesis are the kings listed in the Genesis 4 and 5 king lists. Analysis of the Gen. 4 and 5 kinship reveals that the founder of the lines descending from Cain and Seth is not Adam, but Enoch.


Sorting the historical from the legendary and the mythological

Sometimes it isn't easy to sort the historical from legend or from myth. King Menes probably lived, but he is veiled in legend and myth to the degree that some believe that he was not historical.
In the ancient world people didn't make sharp distinctions between mythological and historical. For example, the ancient Egyptians began their official history with a king named "Meni" or Menes. Menes was credited with founding the First dynasty of Egypt, around 3100 BC. He may have been an historical figure or he may be a mythical founder similar to Romulus and Remus for ancient Rome. We don't know, but that doesn't lessen the significance of his story or minimize the reality of founders of whole civilizations.

The name Meni or Meri has associations with Noah. Mount Meri is likely the mountain where Noah's ark landed, probably in the area of modern Kenya or Tanzania.

Whether historical or archetypal ancestor, Adam and Eve are the founders of the human race in biblical parlance. They are the first Father and first Mother, the first Husband-Wife relationship. It is self-evident that the human race propagates through biological reproduction and this involves a father and a mother. Clearly, at some point in the past there was at least one original set of parents, but their names are not known as they lived many millions of years ago.

The Afro-Asiatics from whom we receive the Bible called the first parents Adam and Eve. These names intend to explain the function of the Father and the Mother. Adam is of the earth/dust yet he lives by the breath of God. He is the one from whom Eve receives her material substance since she is made from his body. Eve is the “mother of all the living” which indicates her function as the birth-giver. The meaning of these names is not prototypal, but archetypal. An archetype has symbolic value. It represents all the others in a group or class, in this case all humanity.

It is genius to use an archetype to represent humanity when there is no knowledge of the prototype of humanity. And the archetype stitches biblical theology together, for without the First Adam (humans in the condition of sin) we would not be able to understand the Second Adam (humans as they are in Christ).

The relationship of Adam and Eve serves as the archetype for the relationship of Christ and His Church, for just as Eve received life through Adam’s body, so the Church receives life through Christ’s Body. The symbolism is so rich! The kinship pattern of Abraham's Horite people speaks of many mysteries revealed in Jesus Christ.

The relationship of Adam and Eve gains further dimension when they are explored in light of the Patriarchal narratives. To receive his own kingdom, Abraham had to leave his father’s house. Likewise, Genesis 2:24 says, “For this reason a man will leave his Father and his mother and cleave to his wife…”, so Christ left His Father’s house to become one with His Bride.

Before Isaac could receive the kingdom from his father, he had to marry. Likewise, Christ will marry His bride before He receives the eternal Kingdom from His Father. As Abraham and the rulers of his people had two wives, it is likely that Isaac married a sister-wife as well as Rebekah, his patrilineal cousin. This was the pattern of the Horite ruler-priests. This is why Abraham went to great pains to see that Isaac married his second wife before he died. Here is a wonderful mystery: before the Father delivers the Kingdom to the Son, the Son must marry his Bride, the Church. Christ has said that until that great day He shall not drink of the fruit of the vine.


Related reading: Adam Was a Red Man; The Genesis King Lists; The African Cultural Context of Genesis 1-11; The Genesis Creation Stories; The First Historical Persons in Genesis; Adam and Eve: The Blood and the Birther

Was Abraham a Liar?

Alice C. Linsley


When Abraham asked Sarah to tell Pharaoh that she was his sister, was he asking her to lie? When he told her to “say that you are my sister so that it might go well with me” was he attempting to deceive? That is the common claim, but one that Scripture does not support.

The point is that Abraham was not a liar. Sarah was indeed Abraham's half-sister. They had different mothers, but the same father. This was the Horite marriage and ascendancy pattern. In this pattern we find that each of the rulers of Genesis had two wives. One was a half-sister, as was Sarah to Abraham. She was taken at an early age, probably around age 20. The other was a patrilineal cousin as was Keturah to Abraham. This wife was taken later in life.  Abraham was married to Sarah and Keturah at the same time. Keturah was the mother of Abraham's first born son Yaqtan (Joktan).

Analysis of the marriage and ascendancy structure of Abraham's family reveals the distinctive pattern of the Horite ruler-priest caste. Abraham's father had two wives. Moses' father had two wives. Samuel's father had two wives. Moses' Kushite wife was his half-sister, as was Sarah to Abraham. The pattern of Moses' family is identical to that of the rulers listed in Genesis 4, 5 and 11, and to that of Abraham's father Terah and Samuel's father Elkanah." It appears that all of these great men of the Bible were Horites.

The Horite marriage and ascendancy pattern can be traced from Genesis 4 to Jesus, proof that Jesus is a direct descendant of Abraham.

The sister wife motif

E.A. Speiser writes, “All three passages [Gen. 12:10-20; Gen. 20:1-13 and Gen. 26:1-14] give essentially the same story: a patriarch visits a foreign land in the company of his wife. Fearing that the woman’s beauty might become a source of danger to himself as the husband, the man resorts to the subterfuge of passing himself off as the woman’s brother.” (Anchor Bible Commentary on Genesis, p. 91. Italics mine.)

Speiser would lead us to believe that Abraham was both a lair and a coward. He misses that there is a difference between what Abraham says and what Isaac says. Isaac does lie when he claims that Rebecca is is sister.  She was his patrilineal cousin.

Abraham explains that Sarah “is really my sister, my father’s daughter though not my mother’s” (Gen. 20:12). This piece of information would surely have caused Pharaoh to ask more questions since kinship was a matter of great concern to rulers. This would have given Abraham the opportunity to explain his people's kinship pattern and since this pattern is unique to ruler-priests of the Horites, Pharaoh would have been forced to recognize Abraham as one to be protected as family. The Horites worshiped Horus (known also as the “Son of God”) and Egypt was the main center of Horus worship.

The Horites were a caste of ruler- priests who married the chaste daughters of other Horite priests. Joseph, the first-born son of Jacob by Rachel, married Asenath, the daughter of the "priest of On" (Gen. 41:45). On is Heliopolis, the City of the Sun. It was perhaps the most prestigious shrine city of the ancient world and it was under the direction of Horite ruler-priests.

When Abraham explained his kinship pattern, the Pharaoh would have recognized it as that of the Horite ruler caste. The Pharaohs also married sisters, as is evident in Egyptian texts. The beauty of the sister bride is praised throughout Egyptian poetry and in the Song of Solomon. Abraham married his half-sister, as did his father Terah and his grandfather Nahor. This was a characteristic of their ruler-priest kinship pattern, as analysis of the Genesis genealogies reveals.

In Genesis 26, we find that Isaac employs his father's method to gain Abimelech’s attention in Gerar which was in the heart of Horite territory (see map). It is significant that only Isaac does this, since he was the son designated to rule after his father. Though Abraham had 7 or 8 other sons, none of them are reported to have tried this ruse. This suggests that these stories are not about deceit and cowardice, but about gaining the ruler’s recognition and favor. This would be necessary to become established in the land, which he did. Abraham's territory was between Sarah's settlement in Hebron and Keturah's settlement in Beersheba.

This is further substantiated by the fact that Abraham and Isaac were not visiting “foreign” lands as Speiser claims, but were in territory under Horite - Egyptian control. Kadesh and Shur (Gen. 20:1) were in Horite territory under the control of the Pharaohs. Abraham's mother's people controlled territory between Mt. Hor (northeast of Kadesh) and Mt. Harun (near Petra). Genesis 10:30 tells us that these were the clans whose dwelling place extended from Mesha “all the way to Sephar, the eastern mountain range.” They are called Horites in Genesis 14:6, 36:20 and in Deuteronomy 2:12.

Numbers 33:27-28 mentions 'Terah' as a place near Mount Harun in Jordan. Besides being the name of Abraham's father, Terah is also the name of an Arabian tribe (Terabin) that dwells chiefly between Gaza and Beersheba. So clearly Abraham was not in a foreign land. He was in territory ruled by his ancestors and he deserved to have his status recognized, which chiefly would have been done by verifying his kinship.

The Egyptians took pleasure in sex, but regarded adultery was an grave offense, especially for a ruler since such an unrighteous act would put his kingdom under divine judgment. This is why both Pharaoh and Abimelech were angry that Abraham should put them at risk, but in both instances the God of Abraham protected Sarah and the ruler long enough for Abraham to accomplish his objective of gaining the ruler’s favor.

In the ancient world, Horite rulers were known for their pure conduct and sobriety. They were known for their devotion to the High God whose emblem was the Sun. Plutarch wrote that the “priests of the Sun at Heliopolis never carry wine into their temples, for they regard it as indecent for those who are devoted to the service of any god to indulge in the drinking of wine whilst they are under the immediate inspection of their Lord and King. The priests of the other deities are not so scrupulous in this respect, for they use it, though sparingly.”


Related reading: Who Were the Horites?; Abraham and Job: Horite Rulers; Who was a Bigger Liar: Abraham or Isaac?; Abraham's Complaint

Where Did Noah's Ark Land?

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

The Peshitta is a version of the entire Bible read by Syrian Christians. The Old Testament of the Peshitta was translated from the Hebrew, probably in the 2nd century A.D. and is a late recension. This is the Bible that St. Ephrem the Syrian knew. 

In the Peshitta, Genesis 8:4 says that Noah's Ark landed in the “mountains of Quardu.” Quardu is an Akkadian word that refers to warlike mountain people. (See The Origin of Kurds, p. 77) These warlike mountain people were in the R1b Haplogroup, the same haplogroup as Noah and his sons.

A reader of Just Genesis has suggested that Noah's Ark landed on Ararat because that area is mainly populated by Armenian and Assyrian Turks who are the "new kids on the block", but the land is called "Hyastan" after Haig or Haicus who the Armenians regard as the son of Togarmah (Gen. 10). Hyastan means "Land of Hiacus" and the Armenians call themselves Haiks.

I wouldn't be surprised that Japhid/Japheth has a connection to the Lake Van area. The descendants of Japheth are found in Europe, especially in Hungary, Turkey, Pakistan, Mongolia. There are also some in the Nile Valley. This explains the linguistic similarity between some Afro-Asiatic roots and some Turkish, Pashtun and Mongolian roots, including Jochi, Beri, Malik and Khan.

Khan was originally a title meaning king. Today it is a common surname in Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Mongolia. It is equivalent to the Afro-Asiatic Kain or Kayan/Qayin. Some of the Pashtun tribes adopted Malik as the ruler's title instead of Khan. Malik is equivalent to the Afro-Asiatic Melek, meaning king or ruler.

Genghis Khan married a woman of the Olkut’Hun, or Ogur Hun meaning the Hun clan/community. The word ogur means clan/community and appears to be equivalent to the Pashto orkut, meaning community. It appears that ogur, orkut, and olkut are cognates and likely related to the Kandahar dialect, which has Tir-hari as a principal dialect. Tir is a form of the name Tiras, mentioned in Genesis 10, and hari is a form of the word for Horite. Genghis Khan married into a community which had ancestral connections to Abraham's Horite Hebrew people.

In the Hungarian origin stories, Nimrod had two sons: Magor and Hunor. Magor is the equivalent of the Afro-Asiatic name Magog and the Hungarian word Magyar. Magyar is the name for the Hungarian people. Some Magyar still live in the Upper Nile area where they are called the Magyar-ab, the Magyar tribe.

The descendants of Japheth appear to have been geographically separated from Noah's other 2 sons whose lines intermarried. However, Genesis 9:27 suggests the clan of Japheth remained in close contact with the other Hebrew clans. "God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem." (Gen. 9:27) The early Hebrew clans intermarried (endogamy), and geographical distances apparently did not impede the exchange goods, or the movement cargo along the major river systems. The dispersion of the early Hebrew kingdom builders has been reasonably well demonstrated by comparative religion, linguistics, onomastics, archaeology, and anthropology.

These populations associated with Noah and his people in Gensis 10 are in Haplogroup R1b which has a high concentration in the region of lake Chad, Noah's homeland. However, the dispersion of the R1b peoples took place before the tie of Noah (C.4100-4000 B.C.) and was complete by 40,000 years ago.

The archaic rulers controlled major water systems and mountain ridges at a time when Africa, the Levant, and Mesopotamia were much wetter. The descendants of Japheth moved into the region of what is today Hungary and some Magyar-Ab reside in the Nile Valley.

The data of Genesis acknowledges an eastward movement out of Africa. Adam and Eve went east. Cain went east, and we find Cain's descendants, the Kenites, living in Canaan. However, the evidence suggests that the biblical Noah lived in the area of Lake Chad. This is the only place on earth that is claimed by the indigenous peoples to be his homeland. The local Kanuri people call Lake Chad Buhar Nuhu, meaning "Sea of Noah."  Two regional names mean the "land of Noah" - Borno and Benue. 

Related reading: An Anthropologist Looks at Genesis 6; An Anthropologist Looks at Genesis 7, An Anthropologist Looks at Genesis 8; Noah's Descendants; Finding Noah's Ark; Noah's Sons and Their Descendants; INDEX of Topics at JUST GENESIS

Genesis and the Eucharist

Alice C. Linsley


The Eucharist as life-giving sacrifice is prefigured in Genesis in the way that God slays the animal to clothe the naked Adam and Eve. Here God serves as Tahash, an order or caste of priests. The sacrifice of Christ is also prefigured in the offering up of Isaac. As the Church Fathers noted, Christ's sacrifice is prefigured throughout the Old Testament.

Genesis 3 presents God as offering the first sacrifice as a covering for shame when HE clothes Adam and Eve with skins of a sacrificed animal. Genesis 22 points the Cross. Here the father receives back the son "on the 3rd day" and a ram is caught by its extended horns in the thicket - another image of Christ on the Cross. As Patrick H. Reardon reminds us, "Since Melito of Sardis in the mid-second century, Isaac's carrying of the wood has always signified to Christians the willingness of God's own Son to take up the wood of the Cross and carry it to the place of sacrifice." (Creation and the Patriarchal Histories, p. 87.)

We also find Jesus' Passion in Joseph's story, who was betrayed by his brothers, cast into the pit and sold. He was unjustly accused, suffered and showed mercy to his oppressors. He was abased yet elevated to glory. He was believed dead yet found alive.

The pattern of Christ's passion is written across time and eternity so that "all are without excuse". From “before the foundation of the world,” the redeeming work of Christ has been known (1 Peter 1:18-20).

Ontologically the Eucharist is the single moment of sacrifice by which we repentent sinners are saved - and by which the world was made - a difficult concept to get our Western minds around since we tend to think of the Christ in chronological terms rather than metaphysically, as is more common in the East.

Yet when we look at Scripture and Holy Tradition we find the symbols of life - the Water and the Blood - consistently pointing to the Cross. And the Creed reminds us that all things were made through Him, both visible and invisible. The Cross is that moment when "it is finished"; that is, His sacrifice and the creation and redemption of the world are conterminous. In the Eucharist, we repentent sinners are admitted to this moment by God's grace. And grace is granted to the priest to stand in that moment with Christ, not simply in Persona Christi, but as one who himself is sacrificed (the oblation). Is this not catholic teaching?


Related reading: The Origins of Christianity; Who is Jesus?; Two Passovers and Two Drunken Fathers

Why Jesus Visited Tyre

Alice C. Linsley

Tyre is mentioned often in the Old and New Testaments, often in connection with Sidon. One of the more intriguing passages that mentions Tyre is Ezekiel 28:11-19:

"Son of Man, raise a lament over the king of Tyre and say to him: Thus says the Lord God: You were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and flawless beauty. You were in Eden, in the Garden of God; every precious stone was your adornment... and gold beautifully wrought for you, mined for you, prepared the day you were created."

The ruins of Tyre

This is one of the rare references to Eden outside Genesis and it deserves closer inspection. Here the 'Son of Man' is the prophet Ezekiel through whom God declares judgement on the King of Tyre who is pictured as adorned with jewels and exalted. Ezekiel uses the exile from paradise to describe the king's fall from glory. But is there more here?  Yes, there is a Messianic message.

Ezekiel is told to prophecy against the King of Tyre because he was no longer “perfect.”  The ruler who was once full of wisdom in the Garden has fallen into sin and is being judged. Here we have a glimpse of God's economy by which guidance is always delivered in the proper order. The Father first sends the Son to those whose ancestors were in Eden and the people of Tyre recognized Him. Likewise, the angels first appear to the shepherd kings of Bethlehem, David’s people, to declare the coming of the Son, and the shepherds went straight away to worship Him.

Another example involves Jesus at Capernaum on the northwestern edge of the Sea of Galilee. The Sea of Galilee was between the territory of the Aramaeans (descendants of Nimrod) and that of the Afro-Arabian descendants of Joktan, Peleg’s brother. In Peleg’s time, the Aramaean and the Afro-Arabian descendants of Kush became separate kingdoms. Joktan’s holding extended from Jok-neam in the hill country southwest of the Sea of Galilee to Jok-deam, in the hill country just south of Hebron. Peleg’s holding extended north from the Sea of Galilee to Damascus. By the time we meet Abraham in Genesis 12, the Aramaeans controlled the water systems of Mesopotamia. Terah’s holding extended the length of the Euphrates, from Haran in the north to Ur in the south.

The Sea of Galilee sat between the two kingdoms and was controlled by the rulers on both sides. The two ruling houses intermarried. At Capernaum Jesus comes as Immanuel to both the Aramaeans and the Afro-Arabians. Both are his people since His ancestry is traced by both lines. So Jesus is first known at Capernaum. Mark and Matthew agree on this point, though they present their material differently.

In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus' true identity is recognized in the ancient island city of Tyre, not on a mountain as in Matthew's Gospel. For Mark, the Messiah’s appearing means the beginning of the restoration of Paradise. Perhaps the evangelist was thinking of this passage from Ezekiel 28. That would explain why Mark makes so much of Jesus’ visit to Tyre.

Tyre was the home of Hiram I, the father of the Tyrian king who helped to build Solomon’s temple. Hiram I was kin to David and sent skilled artisans to help David build a palace in Jerusalem, “the city of the Great King” (Matt. 5:35). Hiram is also known as "Huram" and "Horam", which are versions of the names Hur, Hor and Harun (Aaron), as in Jabal Harun, the Mountain of Aaron.

According to Midrash, Hur was Miriam’s husband, and a brother-in-law to Moses. Hur’s grandson was one of the builders of the Tabernacle. I Chronicles 4:4 lists Hur as the "father of Bethlehem," a settlement in the heartland of Horite Hebrew territory.

In other words, King Hiram I and David were descendants of Horite Hebrew ancestors, a caste of ruler-priests who anticipated the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15. Their Horite Hebrew lineage went back to Eden. The Horites believed that the promised Seed of the Woman would be born of their blood and they expected Him to visit them. In Mark 7:24, this expectation was fulfilled when the Son of God visited Tyre, where we are told Jesus “could not pass unrecognized.”


Related reading:  Horite Territory; Who Were the Horites?; The Holy One Hidden and Revealed; The Nazareth-Egypt Connection; Sidon Archaeological Site Alters Global Views

Oldest Human Fossils

WASHINGTON – The story of humankind is reaching back another million years as scientists learn more about "Ardi," a hominid who lived 4.4 million years ago in what is now Ethiopia. The 110-pound, 4-foot female roamed forests a million years before the famous Lucy, long studied as the earliest skeleton of a human ancestor.

This older skeleton reverses the common wisdom of human evolution, said anthropologist C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University.

Rather than humans evolving from an ancient chimp-like creature, the new find provides evidence that chimps and humans evolved from some long-ago common ancestor — but each evolved and changed separately along the way.

"This is not that common ancestor, but it's the closest we have ever been able to come," said Tim White, director of the Human Evolution Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

Read the full report here and note the assumptions that Lucy and Ardi are somehow less than human when the reserachers have concluded that these were human and not apes.


Important facts about Ardi and the Ardipithecus ramidus:

These 30+ skeletal finds represent the earliest known skeletons from the human family. The team found dozens of bones scattered over an area of 33 to 49 feet. The teeth to fit the range of human dentition and are not the dagger-like canines in male chimps and gorillas.

Paleoanthropologists are largely in agreement that the "Apes of the South" (Johanson's term for Lucy's community) were humans who lived about 3.2 million years ago. Ethiopian Ardi pushes that back about one million years. Lucy was found only about 45 miles from where Ardi was found. At the time these populations lived in east Africa it was forested, as was much of Africa. The bones were found in a stretch of the Awash River, near the village of Aramis in Ethiopia.

Ardi walked upright and stood on 2 legs. She shared food with others in her community. These remains reveal human dentition, not that of apes. It has taken 17 years for scientists to reconstruct and analyze these Ardipithecus ramidus findings which included the bones of no less than 35 individuals.

Paleoanthropologist Tim White led the University of California at Berkeley research team.

Physical evidence indicates that humans appeared as humans and unheralded by sub-human ancestors more than 4 million years ago. Apes do not share food or hunt cooperatively.