CWIS: Christian Women in Science
Group HomeGroup Home Blog Home Group Blogs
Search all posts for:   

 

View all (129) posts »

When is the Evidence Sufficient?

Posted By Alice C. Linsley, Tuesday, January 13, 2015

 

Alice C. Linsley

I recently had a conversation with a man named Toshio who wanted to know how I came to the conclusion that Abraham was a descendant of Nimrod. He was not satisfied by my answers:

Nimrod was a Kushite ruler, the son of Kush, according to Genesis 10. He was a sent-away son like Abraham, Moses, Jacob, David and Jesus Christ. It is to the sent-away sons that God delivers a kingdom. These sons are the heroes of biblical history. Nimrod was such a son. This means that he was not in line to ascend to the throne of his father Kush. He and his brother Raamah (Gen. 10:6-12) established themselves as rulers in territories to the east. Raamah ruled in Southern Arabia. Nimrod's relocation to the Tigris-Euphrates Valley represents the Kushite migration out of the Nile Valley, something that has been confirmed by DNA studies and by evidence in other sciences. This migration of the Kushite rulers out of Africa was driven by their marriage and ascendancy pattern.

Linguistically, the language of Nimrod's kingdom - Akkadian - has close affinity to the languages of the ancient Nile Valley as has been demonstrated by Christopher Ehret's research. Ehret also recognizes that cattle were domesticated in Sudan as early as 9000 year ago. These cattle-herding Proto-Saharan or Saharo-Nubian peoples were among Abraham's ancestors.

Molecular genetics also confirms the Biblical data that points to the cradle of modern languages being between Lake Chad (Noah's homeland) and the Nile Valley. See this from the European Journal of Human Genetics advance online publication 26 March 2014; doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.41

Y-chromosome E haplogroups: their distribution and implication to the origin of Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralism


Eyoab I Gebremeskel and Muntaser E Ibrahim 

Archeological and paleontological evidences point to East Africa as the likely area of early evolution of modern humans. Genetic studies also indicate that populations from the region often contain, but not exclusively, representatives of the more basal clades of mitochondrial and Y-chromosome phylogenies. Most Y-chromosome haplogroup diversity in Africa, however, is present within macrohaplogroup E that seem to have appeared 21 000–32 000 YBP somewhere between the Red Sea and Lake Chad. The combined analysis of 17 bi-allelic markers in 1214 Y chromosomes together with cultural background of 49 populations displayed in various metrics: network, multidimensional scaling, principal component analysis and neighbor-joining plots, indicate a major contribution of East African populations to the foundation of the macrohaplogroup, suggesting a diversification that predates the appearance of some cultural traits and the subsequent expansion that is more associated with the cultural and linguistic diversity witnessed today. The proto-Afro-Asiatic group carrying the E-P2 mutation may have appeared at this point in time and subsequently gave rise to the different major population groups including current speakers of the Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralist populations. 

Analysis of the Lamech segment shows that the lines of Cain and Seth intermarried, which means that Abraham is a descendant of both rulers. The lines of Ham and Shem intermarried also, which means that Abraham is a descendant of both those rulers.

Analysis of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of Abraham's ancestors reveals a fixed pattern for the ruler who ascends to the throne. That pattern applies to Lamech the Elder, Nahor the Elder, Terah, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Amram, Moses and Elkanah, Samuel's father.

Here is the diagram showing the intermarriage of the lines of Ham and Shem and Nimrod's marriage to his patrilineal cousin. Note that she named their first born son after her father, following the pattern of these rulers. This is called the "cousin bride's naming prerogative." According to the marriage and ascendancy pattern of these Biblical rulers, Nimrod married a daughter of Asshur (Ash-Ur means throne of Ur). She would have been his second wife and this marriage took place shortly before he ascended to the throne of his father. His father was likely Sargon I. They were great kingdom builders of the ancient world.



Toshia was concerned that I cannot point to a place in the Bible that says Nimrod married the daughter of Asshur. I have reconstructed this based on the unchanging Horite marriage and ascendancy pattern that is found in Genesis. I am a scientist and I have to go by the best data available, especially when there has been consistent repetition of the marriage and ascendancy pattern. I apply the tools of anthropology to the Biblical text. I am a Biblical Anthropologist. Anthropology is a relatively new science, but it has developed some reliable methods and principles.

Science require observation of details and record keeping, and there is always the possibility that the next experiment might not provide the same results or conform to the hypothesis as did earlier experiments.

This radical doubt poses a problem for scientists. It means that the scientific method cannot be said to ascertain beyond doubt. This is Hume's problem of induction. Inductive methods predict or infer and are essential in scientific reasoning. One cannot assume that something is immutable and necessary because it has always or usually been reliable in the past. Though 20 experiments produce the same results, we have no certainty that the results will be the same after experiments 21, or 32 or 45. Though the sun has risen daily since the founding of our solar system, we have no certainty that it will always do so.

In 1953, Richard Rudner published "The Scientist qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments,” in which he argued that since no hypothesis is ever completely verified, in accepting a hypothesis the scientist must make the decision that the evidence is sufficiently strong to warrant the acceptance of the hypothesis. The problem of induction which David Hume framed so precisely is really a problem of decision about which action to take, not proof of the fallibility of science in general. 

I assure my readers and Toshio that I have not tried to impose on the text something that is not there. My method is to begin with the Biblical text, trusting that it is reliable and truthful. Indeed, that is my working hypothesis.

Related reading: Genesis in Anthropological PerspectiveKushite Kings and the Kingdom of GodNimrod Was a Nilo-Saharan RulerThe Kushite Marriage Pattern Drove the Kushite ExpansionThe Genesis King ListsDNA Research Confirms Kushite MigrationThe Descendants of Kain and SethThe Nubian Context of YHWHSolving the Ainu Mystery

Tags:  Biblical Anthropology 

Permalink | Comments (2)
 

Comments on this post...

...
Lynn L. Billman says...
Posted Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Alice, thanks for posting this. Anthropology, and your specialization of Biblical anthropology, is something I know nothing about, except for your posts. Some more articles that are like basic tutorials into the fundamentals of modern anthropology, the key questions, the primary tools, and how all these are applied to biblical studies, would be welcome sometime. Thanks!
Permalink to this Comment }

...
Alice C. Linsley says...
Posted Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Kinship analysis is a primary tool of Cultural Anthropology. When applied to the so called "genealogies" of the Bible it helps us to understand the ruler-priests of the ancient world, the practice of intermarriage between their lines, and makes it possible to rack their dispersion. The genealogies are actually king lists. The oldest king list in the Bible is that of Cain in Genesis 4. Cain/Kain become the archetype of the worldly ruler in the Bible. By the time that Jude wrote his epistle (c. 68 AD) Cain was solidly established as the archetype of an earthly ruler. Jude warns those who might abandon Christ because of their suffering and false teachers that God punishes those who rebel against Him. He uses three men as examples: Cain the ruler, Balaam the prophet, and Korah the priest.

The Bible tells us many details about Cain, all of them pointing to his rank as a ruler. When he was born his mother declared kan-itti. E.A. Speiser noted that Qany(ty) or Qan itti shows close affinity to the Akkadian itti, as in itti šarrim, which means "with the king". Akkadian was the language of the empire during Nimrod's time (BC 2290-2215). Genesis 10 tells us that Nimrod was a Kushite, so it is not surprising to find that Akkadian shares many words with Nilotic languages. Among the Oromo of Ethiopia and Somalia, itti is attached to names. Examples include Kaartuumitti, Finfinneetti and Dimashqitti. That itti is associated with Nilotic rulers is evident in the name Nefertitti.

Cain was a tiller of the soil (Gen. 4:2). He controlled a territory as did Noah, one of his descendants, who was said to have planted a vineyard.

Cain married his cousin, the royal daughter of Enoch (Anak) as evidenced by analysis of the Genesis 4-5 kinship pattern.

He was a city builder (Gen. 4:17) as was his descendant Nimrod. These cities represent sacred centers of larger territories.

Cain is associated with metal smiths and one of his descendants, Tubal-Cain, is said to be a great patriarch of smiths. Smiths held a high social status in the ancient world and were in service of the king and the high priest. Early in the upper Nile, Badari smiths smelted copper. These are the same people who used ritual flint knives for circumcision, such at that used by Zipporah.

Cain’s name is derived from the word meaning “possession” or “lot”. As the first born son, he inherited the role of ruler. We might ask if he inherited it from Adam or by marrying into the House of Enoch (Anak/Anakim - the "mighty men of old").

He was a religious man, offering sacrifice to God, though his sacrifice wasn’t always acceptable (Gen. 4:5).

His bride named their first-born son after her father, which was the pattern among the ruler-priests of Abraham’s people for the cousin. This suggests that Cain had another wife, a first wife.

The feminine version of the word Kain is Kandake or Kantake, which, unfortunately, is translated as a proper name in the Bible - Candace. Kandake/Candace means queen. Biblical anthropology is very helpful in placing Biblical material in its proper historical context and can help us avoid errors in interpretation.
Permalink to this Comment }