by Steve Risner
The last two weeks we have looked at the origin of language (here and here). It seemed to me to be fairly conclusive—language did not come about through the means that evolutionists must believe it did. There is no evidence for their theories, and in fact the evidence stands, for the most part, in contrast to their preconceived ideas. This, I think, is strong evidence for the Divine origin of language in general.
Language is an amazing thing that truly is a major divider between God's image bearer—man—and the animals. Dr. Noam Chomsky, arguably one of the world's leading linguists and a staunch evolutionist, said about language: “Human language appears to be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal world… There is no reason to suppose that the ‘gaps’ are bridgeable. There is no more of a basis for assuming an evolutionary development of ‘higher’ from ‘lower’ stages in this case, than there is for assuming an evolutionary development from breathing to walking.” Language is such a part of being human that there has never been a people group found that did not have a very complex form of language. Another formidable linguist, Derek Bickerton, in his work Babel's Cornerstone, in regards to Terence Deacon's work on language says, “Time after time, in sorting through the countless proposals put forward by language evolutionists, Deacon makes the right choices. Could language have come directly out of some pre-human trait? No. Does it resemble forms of animal communication? No… no ape, despite intensive training, has yet acquired even the rudiments of syntax, and many language acquisitionists insist that syntax is there even at infants’ one-word stage… Deacon does not begin to grapple with the really difficult problems—how words emerged, how syntax emerged. But these problems lie at the heart of language evolution.” These men are strong supporters of evolution, but they are openly admitting that evolution has no real answers at all for the origin of languages.
But what about language families? That is, what about the fact that there are several (dozens really) different language types that seemingly have absolutely no relation to each other whatsoever? This, again, seems to confirm what the Bible says about the dispersion at the Tower of Babel. It equally makes it more difficult for evolutionists to explain. It's similar to convergent evolution—the outlandish idea that two or often several completely different and unrelated organisms developed nearly identical anatomy or physiology. This is what needs to happen for language as there is no evidence for a single language in all the world. There are multiple (how many we can't say... 20s to 70s or even 100) language families that have diversified into about 6000 languages across the globe. Let's look into that in more detail.
There are inherent problems with looking back in time at language. The fact that there are a number of different languages in and of itself creates a problem for Darwinists. There is literally no evidence that would suggest there was one proto-language or one original language. There are a large number of language types. How many language families there are/were is never going to be known. As languages devolve from their primary source, they can do so rapidly. In fact, some estimates suggest the rate of words being replaced over time is so fast, you couldn't recognize a language by a single word within 10,000 years of its genesis. This is according to Terry Crowley's book An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. So over time, it becomes increasingly more difficult to compare two languages to see if they're related or not.
This brings up a good question: why would man create/develop a form of communication that would actually prevent him from talking to other members of his own species? Many animals can be uprooted and taken to thousands of miles away to others of their species and still be able to interact. Often times man cannot do this because of language barriers. What would be the advantage to having a large number of languages? There is none, really. In fact, according to the Bible, it's the exact opposite. It's because of its hindrance that language barriers were created. This in and of itself helps to confirm the Biblical account and should help us to reject the evolutionist's claims.
We know from our previous posts that language, as I alluded to above, actually becomes simpler over time; it devolves. This is clearly seen in many examples like Latin and Greek/Sanskrit and is the opposite of evolution (simple to more complex). These languages are so complex and consistent it's inconceivable that random chance caused these highly sophisticated communication systems to come into being. How did they amass such a large number of adherents? The Indo-European group is another that, according to some experts, seems to have originated about 3000 years ago or more. That's nice for the Bible believer, since that neatly coincides with the Biblical timeline for the Tower of Babel (give or take a little time). The Indo-European language group is very large—covering nearly all of Europe and parts of Asia and the Middle East. English is from this group, as well as Hindi, Iranian, German, Russian, Spanish and a great deal of others. It's the largest group, with just short of half the world's population having an Indo-European language as their primary language. There are dozens of other language groups. Some of them are a single language while many are larger groups.
We know from the above that languages can actually replace themselves in a matter of 100 centuries or so. From this, we can determine that the secularist's timeline for the migration of Asians to North America (Native Americans) must have been much more recent than is believed. The time frame they give is some 11,000 to 25,000 years ago. This couldn't be. There are connections between languages spoken by Amerindians and by Eastern Siberian people. If they splintered off that long ago, there should be no detectable similarities, yet the connection is fairly strong.
How is this relating to the Tower of Babel? Let me tell you: Genesis 11 begins with “Now the whole world had one language and a common speech.” Everyone spoke the same language, which meant it was easy for everyone to work together to do whatever they saw fit. They hunkered down and stayed in one place, building a city with a great tower to “make a name for ourselves, otherwise, we'll be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” So, according to verses 6-7, God confused their languages. It's possible each family group received its own separate language family. Over time, these 70 or so language groups would differentiate into the thousands of languages we have today. Five thousand years is plenty of time for this to happen. After God confused their languages, the people scattered—some as far away as North and South America. I covered many of the different people groups earlier in this series. This separation would further distinguish one dialect from another. This can easily account for the miracle of language in general as well as explain the origins of the multiple families of languages we see today. The Word of God answers those questions that evolutionists and atheists have literally no answer to at all.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Last week we began looking at language—what is it, how does it happen, and where did it come from? We looked at why man is unique among all living things in his ability to communicate complexly, essentially taking thoughts from his mind and imparting them into the mind of another human. We also briefly looked at the areas of the brain that are essential for language—for both sending and receiving. We hardly mentioned all the muscular actions that are necessary but, trust me, it's a lot! So how do Bible deniers explain the miracle of language?
Scientists who reject the Biblical narrative of history believe that man, once he somehow developed the right areas of the brain, went from making simple, animalistic grunts and groans to making more complex sounds to eventually making words and forming sentences and, finally, to writing things like the Bible, the Iliad, and Hamlet among other things. There are a variety of different versions of this story, but they are all fairly similar. We started making animal sounds like grunts and groans and then, over long periods of time, those sounds became very complex. Essentially, language went from less to more complex over time. Is this what we see happening today?
Ever read Shakespeare? Ever look at the “Amplified” version of the Bible? The truth is, over time language actually becomes simpler. And it's also true that there is no such thing as a “simple” or “primitive” language. Even the most “primitive” languages are highly complex—some more so than more modern languages. In fact, many “primitive” languages are absolutely amazing in their complexity. Do a little research on Native American languages or African languages. They blow English away in terms of complexity. Human children have a remarkable ability to learn language. It's just what they do naturally. No chimp or dog or bird or any animal, really, can do this. Children learn the language of their parents. The areas of the brain responsible for language are 6 times the size of those in chimps (allegedly our nearest relative). Chimps can't talk. They can learn a couple of hand gestures and nothing more but only if taught by a human being who has the gift of language. In most cases, these communications are related to basic survival skills and are extremely basic. A chimp hasn't been taught to express himself, telling us how he feels or how his day went.
There are 3 basic truths about the evolution of language: 1) colloquialisms come and go rather quickly, only sometimes remaining; 2) new words are introduced as they're needed; and 3) when cultures and languages interact over a period of time, they will alter one another.
It's hard to say exactly when a new language is born because it happens so slowly. Recall that French, Spanish and Italian used to be called Latin. They were separated and changed over time. But Latin is vastly more complex than Spanish or Italian or any other language it birthed. The differences are astounding in conjugation, noun usage, gender assignments, etc. Greek is the same way. Greek has 6 words to describe the English “love.” We say love. They would say eros, philia, agape, ludus, pragma, or philautia depending on the situation. The same is true for today's “primitive” languages found in remote tribes. Their language is very complex as are ancient forms of writing. It's fairly universal as we look at just about any language that they do, in fact, get simpler over time. This stands in the face of evolutionist thinking which defies the scientific data. Suzette Haden Elgin says about language, “No known language in the whole of human history can be considered ‘primitive’ in any sense of the word” in her book What is Linguistics? She continues, “… the most ancient languages for which we have written texts—Sanskrit for example—are often far more intricate and complicated in their grammatical forms than many other contemporary languages.”
Human language is far more complex than any communication between animals. Dogs bark. This essentially doesn't mean anything to the dog beyond announcing its presence. Birds chirp or sing. Again, they're not communicating ideas or sharing experiences. They're simply making noise that alerts others to their presence or the presence of danger. That's the end of the complexity, for the most part. Some “higher” mammals may appear to have more complex language skills, but when compared to that of humans, it's like comparing the mass of a flea to the that of a blue whale—it's a completely different scale. Helmut Gipper, a linguist from Germany said,
“All assumptions that human speech developed gradually from animal grunts (the so-called woof-woof theories) or that gestures changed incrementally into audible language, cannot be sustained. Such erroneous hypotheses compare the specifics of human speech with the communication systems of animals. It can be stated emphatically that the essence of human speech is not communication. Communication exists everywhere in the animal kingdom. But human language is in the first place a knowledge medium; this encompasses an intellectual/spiritual access to the observable world. The essence of speech lies in the possibility of assigning specific meanings to articulated sounds, thereby making them mentally accessible.”
That is so profound, I hope you will read it again to get all he is saying. Human language is far more than just noises. It's a way to pass on abstract ideas, share emotions, describe specific experiences, and pass on knowledge. This exists nowhere in the animal kingdom.
Evidence suggests that human language—spoken, written, or whatever form it may take—is far too complex to have evolved from animal sounds. Evidence seems to indicate that language was installed into mankind at the beginning and slowly became less complex over time, although it is exceedingly more complex than any communication between any other species. The fact that language exists at all indicates the necessity for a Creator. The Bible tells us that God spoke to Adam, and Adam understood Him. Adam used his language skills to name all the animals in the Garden of Eden. Language, like man, was created on Day 6.
Next time, we'll look at the languages of the world—there are many. There are some 6000 spoken languages today! There are even organizations whose purpose is to come up with new words, primarily to keep up with technology. That's strange, really, but also amazing! How does this fit with the Biblical narrative of the Tower of Babel? Quite well, but we'll save that for later. Thanks again for reading.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
“Language – the uniquely human ability to build from a few sounds an infinite range of meaning so that the insight and imagination of each of us can be shared among all of us.” -Alan Alda on The Human Spark
“Right now I’m doing something pretty extraordinary. I’m breathing out slowly while at the same time moving my tongue, jaw, and lips in an incredibly fast ballet of movement. I can use this skill to take thoughts in my head and transfer it into yours.” -Professor Simon Kirby
After my delay in writing, I wanted to continue with the Table of Nations and Tower of Babel as a topic. When we think of the Tower of Babel, most often we immediately think of people being driven away from each other due to language barriers that God had created due to man's disobedience. I'd like to briefly look at language as a thing and then look at different languages from around the world. Both of these topics give strong credence to the historical accounts of both creation and the Flood followed by the Tower of Babel. Let's first look at language in general to see if it will give us anything that points to a Creator.
A huge division between man and all other forms of life on earth is language. This is a universal idea, whether we're talking about evolutionists or creationists or someone else for that matter. Mankind essentially owes all of his accomplishments—literally—to his ability to communicate. Birds chirp, whales sing, dogs bark, and bees buzz, but no organisms on earth that we are aware of can even remotely rival the communication skills of human beings. Dogs have no idea that man has landed on the moon and we can't tell them. They are ignorant of the fact that the Himalayas are the tallest mountains on earth. They wouldn't know how to bake a cake or how to play Euchre. All of these things require communication. I'm not just speaking of spoken language, of course, but of all forms of language man has employed over the centuries—written, spoken, artistic, coded, hand gestures, etc. But how did spoken language begin?
Undoubtedly, it was the original form of communication existing before written language and the like. So how did it start? The answer, from a scientific standpoint, is: we have no idea. The difficulty here lies in the fact that we can't dig up fossil evidence of prehistoric language, if such a thing existed. We can look at languages today and see how they've changed over time. We can look at ancient writings, but even these are not really that old in relation to how old secular thinking would place language and writing. All that can be done by scientists in this field is guess work, albeit educated guesses. I'm not suggesting there's no merit to looking into these things scientifically and there certainly are a great deal of theories out there on how man acquired language. There's also the fact that most scientists looking at these questions begin with an assumption that may very well be wrong (and likely is wrong). That assumption is that man is just an ape that's a little smarter than other apes and that language slowly evolved over time from grunts and the like to the complex systems we have today. We'll see in a moment why all of this is demonstrably false and is not supported at all by anything. But first we should look at what is going on physically for speech to take place. There's a lot to it.
There are both hardware and software requirements for speech. This is one of the issues with an evolutionist's musings on how language came to be. One without the other is useless, so which came first? In the brain there are at least 2 very distinct areas that do very different things but are essential for language. One of these areas turns our thoughts into words, and the other turns our words into thoughts. Without one, the other is useless. Let's look at the parts and processes required for speech to be a thing.
Language is a code. Specific sounds, which in and of themselves are meaningless, are assigned meanings. So a human being's thoughts need to be encoded into the agreed upon sound arrangements in the person's brain first. Broca's area, first discovered in 1850, is basically where our thoughts are put into words. I think it's helpful to realize that language is such a part of the human experience that we think in a language. Without that language, processing the most basic thoughts would be extremely difficult. Broca's area seems to be the planning area for speech. This area is activated prior to speaking. Then a very complex orchestration of muscular movements are coordinated in the jaw, throat, face/lips and tongue as well as the intercostal (between the ribs) muscles and diaphragm to produce the desired coded sounds. These sounds are vibrations that pulse through the air. They'll eventually bombard a listener's ear drums and the sounds will be transmitted from the ear to the brain for deciphering. This happens in Wernicke's area — the area responsible for interpreting language.
Wernicke's area actually filters out all other sounds, making it a remarkable bit of hardware. In fact, it's also powerful enough to hear and filter a distorted spoken utterance and ignore it, hear the same utterance intelligibly, and then make sense out of the distorted version upon hearing it again. This area works overtime if you're talking with a toddler or someone who's primary language is not what they're speaking. But, remarkably, it works so well that it's not very often you can't eventually make out what someone is saying even if they're not very clear in their speech.
We also use vision to understand and interpret language. Ever notice that you tend to look at a person's lips when they're speaking to you? There's also a great deal of other things that go into this type of communication. Voice inflection, tone, facial expression, and physical gestures all go into the mix, so a person must be able to decipher not only the sounds accurately and ascribe the correct meaning, but one also must interpret a variety of other things to figure out what thought is being transmitted. This is how a person can say, “Nice job” in such a way as to sound like a compliment or to be sarcastic—a jab at someone.
In short, human interaction via language is extremely complex. Does this make sense if evolution from a single common ancestor is true? Let's see about that next week. You all know I'm a Biblical creationist who believes the Bible and accepts the narrative found in it in Genesis concerning the origins of the universe and earth, life, and specifically man as well as the Flood and Tower of Babel. From there, so many questions about us as humans can be answered, but only if we're honest enough to accept the source. Science cannot tell us about origins. It's impossible. Whether it's the origins of the universe, the earth, mankind, life in general, love, faith, language, DNA, etc., science cannot tell us where these things came from. But God has told us. It's in His Word. Within His Word He has given us so many other things that are reliable and trustworthy, why not believe Him when He tells us about how He created the universe, life, man, language, etc.? God spoke with Adam. This would require both areas of the brain described above to be fully functional so he could understand God's statements and also respond to them with his own statements.
We'll take a look at the “evolution” of language next time and see if the stories told by secular linguists hold up to scrutiny or if they are actually contrary to what we know about language. Thanks for reading.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Last week, we began talking about the descendants of Shem, Noah's oldest son. This was the sixth blog post in a series on the Table of Nations found in Genesis 10, which describes where all the people groups of the world came from. We're tracing those lineages to the modern people groups we see today. I've found it fascinating and hope you have as well. Aside from a few, “No, sir! That's not true!” comments, I've not found anything that can explain how these things can be and the Bible not be true. In other words, there is no refutation I am aware of that is greater than, “I don't want this to be true, so I'll call you names and make fun of the information.”
Let's move on to the beginning of the Hebrew people—where did the Jews come from and why were they called Hebrews originally? Last week, we discussed a battle that took place and was written about in Genesis. This was a battle where Abraham went to war against several kings of Elamites to get back his nephew, Lot. That's where I'll pick up for just a moment as we look at a topic that is not only interesting but may be controversial. I hope not, but we'll see.
After this battle mentioned above, Abram (later Abraham) was met by a king and priest from Salem, which was a small town that eventually became Jerusalem. I think that's awesome! This king and priest (a priest BEFORE the Levitical priesthood and before the Law was given at all) was called Melchizedek. This name has been translated “King of Righteousness” but I've found that it is also accurately translated “My King is Righteous.” That's a very different rendering. What's right? I don't know. This was not likely the man's name but was a title given to him. However, it doesn't answer the question: who was this guy? Some say it may have been Jesus (a theophany). Maybe. The neat thing about this is we can speculate all we want and no one can tell us anything beyond what is written in Genesis, Psalms, and Hebrews (the three books of the Bible that mention him), as long as we don't get hung up on it and act like our belief has to be right since there is just not enough information to go from Scripture. Some say he was an angel that was sent to protect Salem and bless Abraham. Maybe, but I tend to think probably not. Jewish tradition holds this was Shem! That's right—the oldest son of Noah who lived 600 years (pretty impressive to most of those living at that time since he outlived most of his great grandchildren). He certainly did live during Abraham's life and, depending on the texts we view, possibly beyond Abraham's life. This is wild! I'm not saying Shem was Melchizedek. I am saying it could be and no one knows, but it would be pretty cool if he was. I don't think that diminishes the priesthood spoken of in Hebrews.
Traditionally according to the Jews, Shem created an academy in Salem (later Jerusalem) where people could acquire knowledge about the Most High. This is another reason it could be possible Shem and Melchizedek are one in the same—they lived in the same place. Yes, Hebrews says the man didn't have a genealogy or a funeral, but I don't necessarily think that needs to be taken 100% literally. He was simply saying this king and priest was exceptional and was making a big deal out of him since he was clearly greater than Abraham, the great patriarch. The writer was also indicating that his priesthood was greater than that of any descendant of Abraham since this priest preceded Abraham and his priesthood came before the priesthood of Levi's tribe. And perhaps, like many other things in Scripture, it may have a double meaning/attribute. There are several things from Scripture that are considered a “type” of Christ—Melchizedek being one of them. The Ark is another, Abraham nearly sacrificing Isaac is another, and so on.
What is crazy is that from Adam to Abraham we have need for only 2 intermediaries—probably Methuselah and Shem. That's because Methuselah probably knew Adam (which, again, blows my mind) so he likely received information and history from him. Methuselah knew Noah and Shem. Shem would have had the history passed on to him from Methuselah, who knew Adam. He then could pass it on to Abraham. Crazy! The book of Genesis covers almost 1/3 of the world's history. Christians would do well to respect that and take the history as it was clearly intended by how it's written—as history. So, again, I'm not saying I know who Melchizedek was. I'm simply saying that, in my studies, I've found there is a case to be made for him being Shem. Why not? He was the oldest son of Noah. He is the great great grandfather of the Heber, who the Hebrews were named after. He was alive at the time and possibly the place. But who can say? There are other cases to be made for him being someone else. I don't know. It is true either way that the history of the creation through the Flood could easily have passed from Adam to Methuselah to Shem and then to Abraham who is considered the father of our faith. I find that very cool.
According to Josephus, Shem's son Arphaxad was the father of the Arphaxadites, also known as Chaldeans. Arphaxad had a son named Sala. His son was Eber. Eber, or Heber, is where the term Hebrew comes from. Eber was the great great great grandfather of Terah, who was Abraham's father. From Abraham come the Jewish people (so named after Abraham's great grandson, Judah).
Abraham's sons have been at war ever since this time. Abraham had a son named Ishmael. This son was from an unlawful union between Abraham and his servant, Hagar—an Egyptian or Hamite. So Ishmael is half Semitic and half Hamitic. The son of promise was Abraham's second son, Isaac. Arabian Muslims claim Ishmael as their father. The Israelites claim Isaac. These two family lines have been at war over land and spiritual authority for quite some time.
Again, as I stated in the previous posts, the evidence for this Table of Nations being accurate and true is found all over the world, especially in the Middle East and surrounding areas. Names of places, rivers, cities, peoples, languages, gods, and the like are found all over the place that confirm this list of families that descend from Noah were real people. Trust in the Bible. It's always found to be true. We'll look at this topic some more in the near future. Thanks for reading.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
This week we will discuss Shem and his descendants. If you've not been following along, we are several posts into a series on the Table of Nations found in Genesis. This tells of the origins of many people groups (all of them actually at the time) and who they descended from. We've discussed the lineage of Japheth here and here and the lineage of Ham here and here. We are now looking at the people groups that came from Noah's oldest son, Shem, from whom we get the term Semite or Semitic. Semitic people are people whose family line goes back to Shem.
According to Genesis 10, Shem had 5 sons—Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram. Let's take a look at them.
Lud is the father of the Lydians who claimed territory in what is now Turkey or Asia Minor, then called Anatolia. Herodutus tells us that the Lydians were a light skinned people. The Egyptians and Assyrians make mention of this people group who are named after this grandson of Noah. It's believed that the Lydians eventually mingled with the Etruscans of Chaldea and migrated to an area in northern Italy. Tuscany is actually named after the Etruscans since they were also known as the Tusci.
Aram is the Hebrew word for Syria. Anytime you see Syria in the Bible, it's translated from the word Aram. The Syrians call themselves Arameans and spoke Aramaic. Aramaic was essentially the international language of the world for a time and Jesus even spoke an Aramaic phrase on the cross. It's likely, with some small changes over time, that Aramaic is a language that was created at the Tower of Babel and, though not extremely common, is still in use today. The Syrian people had their capital at Damascus. Damascus is considered by many to be the oldest continually inhabited city on earth.
Elam fathered the Elamites. Elam is the ancient name for Persia, which is the ancient name for Iran. After Cyrus, the people were generally known as Persians, although the first century AD has record of them being called Elamites still. The Medo-Persian Empire consisted of a mixed people then—Madai being a son of Japheth and Elam being the son of Shem. They've been known as Iranians since the 1930's. The book of Genesis records a battle taking place between the king of Elam and 3 other kings who fought against Abraham. These kings had taken Lot, Abraham's nephew. Abraham soundly defeated the four kings and rescued Lot. It gets very interesting here, but Abraham is a descendant of Arphaxad, and we're not discussing him yet. Stay tuned for some intriguing ideas about Shem and the sons of Eber (whose descendants are the Hebrews). Let's move on to Asshur.
Asshur is the father of the empire named after him—a large, fierce empire that ruled the Middle East, Egypt, parts of the Mediterranean and Turkey as well as Iran and Iraq from 900 BC to 600 BC. As early as 1250 BC, they were using iron weapons which were far superior to other weapons of the time. At the end of their powerful and ruthless reign, the capital city of Nineveh was conquered by the Medes, Persians, and Babylonians. Nineveh was the largest city on earth for nearly 50 years until it was destroyed in a rebellion that brought the end of the Assyrian Empire. Nineveh is where Jonah first refused to go preach against but eventually, after a series of events, went to the city to speak against it. God was going to destroy it because of its wickedness. Because of Jonah's warnings, the entire city repented and turned toward God. This actually angered Jonah because he despised the Assyrians due to their ruthless behavior and disregard for life. They were a people who made war an industry which profited their nation economically quite a lot. The Assyrians managed the largest empire on the planet up to that point. The Mesopotamian god Ashur was likely named after this grandson of Noah, Asshur. Ashur was the head of the Assyrian pantheon. Asshur also passed his name onto the first capital of the “old” Assyrian Empire which was called Assur. Its ruins are along the Tigris River. Today, they reside in parts of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Syria.
Next week we'll discuss the final son of Shem, Arphaxad. He fathered the Hebrews as well as others. I hope you are enjoying this series as much as I am. I find this all fascinating stuff and feel it's very unfortunate that most if not all of it is avoided by most secular teachers. The information lends far too much to the credibility of the Bible, so they cannot bring themselves to discuss it. The evidence is fairly strong—in fact, I'll say the evidence is exceptionally strong and overwhelming for the validity of the Bible. The evidence that points to the Bible's authenticity is found all over the world in the names of cities, peoples, rivers, and regions as well as other things.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Last week we began talking about the sons of Ham. We're a few posts deep in a series about the Table of Nations found in Genesis 10. We've already discussed the sons Japheth here and here and some of the sons of Ham. We'll continue with Ham and his descendants—speaking primarily of Canaan but also others. Let's get into the Native Americans/Amerindians. That is a truly fascinating topic.
Generally, it is accepted by many that the oldest Native American populations that we would call a thriving civilization began around 1700 BC. It seems that there were multiple waves of people that came to the Americas from Siberia (most likely). However, there are portions of people that are considered Amerindians that are nothing like the vast majority of other Amerindians. There seems to be genetic indicators that some of the earliest settlers in the Americas may have been European (or possibly Middle Eastern or North/West African). Many Native American tribes have high percentages of genetic markers that are found in these populations and are not found at all in Asian populations. Is it possible they traveled over the Atlantic to find their way to the “New World”? Probably.
The Greek historian Diodorus wrote that the Phoenicians, out of their passion for exploring for trade, discovered an “island” that was rich with resources and had many rivers to navigate deep within it. None of the actual islands between Africa and the Americas fit this description. The Paraiba Stone is a remarkable piece of evidence to review. Some have called it a forgery, but Cyrus H. Gordon, an American scholar of Near Eastern cultures and ancient languages, studied the stone and its inscription and determined it to be authentic. He claims there are nuances and styles in the characters used that no 19th century forger would have been aware of. It tells the tale of Phoenician people in several ships that were blown out into the Atlantic by a storm and separated from their companions. Eventually, because of the trade winds, they landed in what is now Brazil. This is actually how Brazil was “officially” discovered in 1500 AD by the Portuguese—the discoverer, Pedro Álvares Cabral, found himself in the trade winds and was blown to Brazil. The stone tells us that these people were descendants of Canaan and set sail under orders of their king, Hiram. Hiram was a contemporary of Solomon and was known for sending ships out on long voyages to gather resources and bring them back.
Some of the Native American groups share linguistic and writing similarities with Egyptian languages. Tribes that used hieroglyphics must have been from somewhere other than Asia. Asian cultures didn't use them, but Middle Eastern/African cultures did. Genetic markers, as stated above, also indicate not all of the American Indians were from Asia. Some were from Europe, the Middle East, Northern Africa, or all of the above. The Cherokee, for instance, have markers indicating they're from the Middle East or Africa. Many of these peoples have stories they've passed from generation to generation that are remarkably similar to the Biblical narrative. For instance:
“It is found in the histories of the Toltecs that this age and first world, as they call it, lasted 1716 years; that men were destroyed by tremendous rains and lightning from the sky, and even all the land, without the exception of anything, and the highest mountains, were covered up and submerged in water fifteen cubits [caxtolmolatli]; and here they added other fables of how men came to multiply from the few who escaped from this destruction in a ‘toptlipetlocali’, that this word nearly signifies a closed chest; and how, after men had multiplied, they erected a very high ‘zacuali’, which is today a tower of great height, in order to take refuge in it should the second world (age) be destroyed. Presently their languages were confused, and, not being able to understand each other, they went to different parts of the earth.” --Fernando de Alva Cortés Ixtlilxochitl
The similarities between this tradition and the narrative found in Genesis is obvious, I hope. This sounds like the Flood account on several points, including the time frame from creation to the Flood. The Bible gives a time frame of around 1656 years (approximately) while this tradition is just 60 years different! It describes a global Flood and the Tower of Babel and the dispersion after the confusing of languages. That's amazing!
Percy Bullchild, a member of the Blackfeet tribe, describes his people's history according to their tradition. He describes a spirit that blew life into the nostrils of a human made of mud. He describes how this spirit removed a rib from the human and created a mate for him. This is uncannily similar to the Biblical account.
Vine Deloria, who is not friendly towards Christianity at all but favors the stories of his ancestors and their traditions, says concerning flood stories in these cultures, “Scholars in comparative religion, anthropology, psychology, and folklore usually steer well clear of using flood stories for anything except demonstrating that all societies have these kinds of traditions … Accepting that these flood stories speak of a planetary event, not so long ago, involving significant psychological trauma, would free minds to make progress in all sciences.” He is no friend of the Bible at all but notes that many of the histories told by various Native American tribes are extremely similar to the Biblical account. Of all the things that man would hold to a mythology on, we can see how creation and the afterlife would be strong candidates. But why a flood story? Why are there cultures all over the world, literally, that have a “mythology” that includes a global flood? It is worth noting, also, that some of these flood stories were part of the traditions of people who lived nowhere near large bodies of water.
Also of interest is that many of the Amerindians also tell stories of how they arrived in the Americas. Many claim to have come from the east, not the west. That's interesting, right? A number of people reject these ideas because they believe people from so long ago were not advanced or intelligent enough to travel successfully across the Atlantic. Just this month a man used a 20' row boat to cross the Atlantic from Newfoundland to the Scilly Islands. He used a row boat! He also set a record, which is pretty cool. If you think of it, people were traveling several thousand miles from the Mediterranean to India (around the continent of Africa and over 5000 miles) long ago. This trip is much, much longer than the jaunt across the Atlantic (at just under 2000 miles). Is it really unreasonable to believe Europeans, Africans, or Middle Easterners made the trip?
The legends of these people groups not only trace them back to the Flood, but also the Tower of Babel. The Choctaw Indians and Incas of Peru have similar legends that account for the building of a large monument and the confusing of tongues after a terrible flood. From “History of the Incas,” a history book originally written in the late 1500's, it was written: “One thing is believed among all the nations of these parts, for they all speak generally and as well-known of the general flood which they call ‘unu pachacuti’.” The Popol Vuh of the Mayans says, “In the beginning there was only sky and water and the world was in darkness. Coiled in the water lay the Feathered Serpent … in the sky dwelt Heart of Heaven appearing as three kinds of huracan, or lightening … they fashioned a man out of clay … So the gods made a great flood during which resin fell like rain … most were killed … Finally the people separated, going in different directions and speaking different languages … ” Sound a little familiar?
It seems reasonable that these people (from all over the world so far) tell similar stories about a Flood that killed everything except a few on a boat and a confusion of languages after a huge structure was built because their ancestors witnessed these events and passed them on to their descendants. They also include details about how God created, a serpent lied, and man was brought out from the earth. Sure, it could just be coincidence that they all have striking similarities to the Biblical account and confirm it as history, but the number of stories like this seem to indicate a much more likely idea—the story found in Genesis is true and these people can trace their heritage to Canaan (in the case of most Amerindians).
We'll quickly discuss Egypt next, since we're nearly out of space. The final son of Ham to discuss is Mizraim. Mizraim is what the Hebrews have always called Egypt (very often referred to in the Bible). Misr is the Arabic name for Egypt and it's still called Misr by the Egyptians today—the Arab Republic of Egypt where Egypt is translated Misr. The word Misr comes from the name of Egypt's founder—Mizraim. Josephus says, “The memory also of the Mesraites is preserved in their name, for all we who inhabit this country [of Judea] called Egypt Mestre, and the Egyptians Mestreans.”
We all know about the pyramids that the Egyptians are famous for building. Did you know there are pyramids (sometimes known as ziggurats) all over the world? We can connect this to the topic of the Table of Nations. All the peoples of the world built similar structures after the dispersion. They generally built them as temples of some sort, but not always. These structures are found all over South and Central America (my wife and I have climbed a couple of them in our travels), as well as the Middle East, Sudan, China, Greece, America, India, Indonesia, and Turkey to name a few. Skeptics suggest that these structures inspired the story of the Tower of Babel. I believe the opposite is true—the Tower of Babel may have been pyramidal in construction and, therefore, the people groups that left the Tower at the dispersion were mimicking it. They are frequently associated with religious significance.
We are finding that all people groups have a similar heritage—we all come from the same people. We are, really, one race. Since we are one race, we are all the same, essentially. This means, like all humans, we each are under the curse of sin, and as a result we need a Savior. People around the world who have never met a Christian have within their histories a story that resembles the creation account of the Bible. It makes sense that, over time and with telling the story from one generation to the next without it being written for a long time, that the details might get skewed a bit. But the similarities are certainly enough to show that these ancient stories are rooted in real events that we can reliably read about in the Bible, which hasn't changed over the centuries. Any reasonable, objective, and honest person can see how strong this evidence supports the Biblical narrative. Stay tuned! We'll be talking about Shem and his descendants next time.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Last week we finished up discussing the descendants of Japheth. Japheth is mentioned in numerous unrelated lineages of people groups who either had no contact with each other or hated each other, yet they independently hold Japheth (or Noah) as their ancestor. These include many royal lines in Europe. The history is there if we are willing to accept it. Today I'd like to move on to Ham, another son of Noah.
Before we get into Ham and his descendants, I wanted to point out that it has been commonly understood that civilization began in the area known as Mesopotamia, aka the Cradle of Civilization. Wouldn't you know, the Bible just happens to mention that this is where civilization began, i.e. somewhere in the Near East. Moses, who likely wrote the book of Genesis, was either divinely inspired to write such a thing or he just happened to get very lucky in the area he chose to write about. He describes for us the Tower of Babel and the events that took place leading up to the confusion of languages by God as a result of man determining he would disobey God's orders and “make a name for himself” by building a great tower to heaven. This was just about 100-200 years after the Flood that wiped out all of mankind except Noah, his wife, their 3 sons, and their wives. We've discussed Japheth, the son that was father to most of Europe, India, and some of China. He traditionally had a fairer skin tone. Ham was known as the brother with a darker skin tone. These traits are also indicated by their meanings of their names.
Ham is the father of most, if not all, of Africa. His son Cush became the father of the Cushites who are known as Ethiopians today. Josephus tells us this about the son of Ham “...time has not at all hurt the name of Cush; for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Cushites.” During the 5th century AD, Syrian writers described the Himyarites of South Arabia as Cushaeans and Ethiopians. Explorers of the 1770's indicated that the people of Ethiopia claimed to have descended from Cush, Ham, and Noah after the Flood. It’s interesting that this people was known by everyone as descendants of Cush. The Yoruba, located in Nigeria and other parts of Africa, trace their heritage back to Ham, as do the Beja people. According to Wikipedia, “The Beja are traditionally Cushitic-speaking pastoral nomads native to northeast Africa.” They primarily inhabit Sudan. Hebrews and many others have continually referred to Ethiopians as Cushites. This is found in the Bible quite a lot. The Hebrews also referred to Libya as Phut. Phut was another son of Ham.
Probably the most commonly associated son of Ham to the Bible is Canaan. The Bible indicates in Genesis 10 that Canaan's descendants liked to spread out. They eventually would inhabit much of Asia, Africa, Australia, and the Americas. The Hittites (mentioned numerous times in the Bible as well) are from the line of Canaan as descendants of Heth. They amassed a fairly powerful empire early on (about 2000 BC or so) and were known to the Egyptians and Chinese as well as other peoples. Their nation's ruling city was in Turkey.
Sin (the person, not the act) is likely the father of the Chinese people. The Chinese have a story that goes like this, according to Tom Osterholm: “The Chinese have a tradition that their first king, Fu-hi or Fohi (Chinese Noah), made his appearance on the Mountains of Chin, was surrounded by a rainbow after the world had been covered with water, and sacrificed animals to God (corresponding to the Genesis record). Sin himself was the third generation from Noah (Ham--Canaan--Sin), a circumstance which would provide the right time interval for the formation of early Chinese culture.” Much of Chinese ancient history has resemblances to the Biblical accounts of creation and the Flood including the sign of the rainbow afterwords. This indicated God promised to never flood the entire earth again with water. In fact, the name ascribed to their “Heavenly Ruler” in Chinese is the phonetic equivalent to El Shaddai, the name given to the Hebrew God. There is even strong evidence that the Chinese written language holds many truths about the creation account and Flood as well as God's requirement for sin atonement and much more. It's remarkable, really. You can read more about that here, but there are books on the topic that are more detailed, I believe.
The Greek astronomer Ptolemy referred to China as the land of Sinim after Sin, the ancient ancestor of the Chinese. The Greek and Latin words for China are “Kina” and “Sina” respectively. The striking similarity to the Biblical ancestor Sin is hopefully obvious to the reader. The word sinology even refers to the study of Chinese history. Evidence also strongly seems to indicate that Ham's sons, Sin and Heth, were the ancestors of most of the people of Asian characteristics—sometimes referred to as Mongoloid. These include the vast majority of peoples from Asia, the Arctic, and the Americas. In other words, most people from Asia are descendants of these 2 men. There is a great deal of evidence suggesting these people made their way to the Pacific Islands and over the Bering Strait to Alaska and then down all the way to South America. Again, Canaan's descendants liked to spread out. However, it is likely that not all of the Native Americans came here over the land bridge between Russia and Alaska (exposed because of the Ice Age after the Flood). Some seem to have come from the Middle East, North Africa, and/or Europe.
This is just the beginning of the record of the sons of Ham. We'll talk more about them next week when we discuss the Native Americans/American Indians (Amerindians) as well as Egypt. Again, the connections that seem fairly commonplace are amazing. I hope you, the reader, are enjoying this series as much as I am. I find this stuff amazing. It's a perfect blend of science (which I love) and history (which I love) and confirms the Bible (which I love). This, like so many other things I've written on over the last several years, expresses the truth of the Bible and the Biblical worldview, and it demonstrates why the Christian faith is one supported by the evidence, not in spite of it. “Blind faith” sees all of this evidence which seems to me fairly conclusive, and says, “That's all fake or from people we can't trust. There is no God and the Bible is made up to control people” or some other nonsensical drivel. That's the blind faith of the atheist or agnostic. The evidence is overwhelming, in my humble opinion. Thanks for reading and stay tuned!
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Today we're looking at part 3 of a series about the Table of Nations found in Genesis 10—a long list of people who descended from Noah's sons. These people named are very frequently associated with people groups we still see today. Some have had their common names altered over the thousands of years that have passed since their founding, but these alterations are often easy to track. Last time, we looked at England and the sources of the British people (as well as the British name and the English name). We also noted that Germans can trace their lineage back to Ashkenaz, a son of Gomer, a son of Japheth. Interestingly, a group of people from China also trace their ancestry back to Lo Jah-phu, aka Japheth, and further back to Nuah (Noah), Lama (Lamech), Se-teh (Seth), and Dirt (Adam, which sounds like the Hebrew word for ground). This week, we'll finish up discussing most of Japheth's descendants.
Japheth had a son named Madai. Madai's descendants later became the Medes (named after Madai) and the Persians. These people are now found in present day Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and several other countries in that area. The Medes and Persians are historically significant in that they formed the Medo-Persian Empire under Cyrus (mentioned in the Bible) from about 500-300 BC. Josephus, a Jewish/Roman historian, mentions them in his chronicles, indicating that Madai's descendants were the Madeans, who were called the Medes by the Greeks.
Japheth's sons, Gomer (who founded the Gomerites) and Magog (who founded the Magogites), had descendants that were called the Celts and Sythians. Hesiod, considered the father of Greek didactic poetry and literature, identified Magog with the Scythians and southern Russia about 600 BC, written prior to the book of Ezekiel. Some of Gomer's lineage were called the Galls and later the Galatians. The Irish Celts claim to have descended from Magog, while the Welsh Celts claim to have come from Gomer. The fact is that archaeology and ethnologists can trace these people living in close relation to each other, frequently intermingling and sharing a great many things as they spread into Europe. Those who stayed in Asia Minor were known as the Gauls (Galls) while those that traveled into Russia and Eastern Europe were the Celto-Sythae. They continued to spread across Europe until they reached Ireland. Interestingly, France was called Gaul for some time based on the people who lived there—these descendants of Gomer. Gomerites spread into Spain as well. The Gauls lost their land to the Franks and the land has since been called France. Northwest Spain is still called Galicia after these people. The Welsh people still refer to their language as the Gomeraeg (again, after Gomer, their great great … grandfather).
Other descendants of Gomer found their way to Germany and Scandinavia. The Germans were descended from Ashkenaz (previously mentioned) and some were known as the Goths as well as other groups. Germans also have a heritage going back to Asshur of Shem. When the Askaeni arrived in northern Europe, the land was called Ascania, which later became Scandia, which is where we get Scandinavia. Some of these people eventually became the Saxons (whom we discussed last time). I hope I'm not the only one that thinks this stuff is very cool and extremely interesting. There seems to be evidence that some of Shem's descendants made it into Germany as well and the surrounding area. We'll get to that later when we discuss Shem's lineage.
The name “Caucasian” may likely have come from the name Magog. A Thracian tribe referred to southern Russia as “Gog-chasen.” This means “fortress of Gog.” Gog-chasen can easily be worked into Caucasian, which names a mountain range in southern Russia near the Black and Caspian Seas. These were lighter skinned people that have historically been considered the descendants of Japheth.
Herodotus, the “father of history,” wrote about some of these people centuries before Christ and had no reason to support the Biblical narrative (since he's Greek and not Jewish). He specifically mentions several of them (I referenced that a bit last time). He obviously used the people groups' Greek names, but we can trace them back to the families mentioned in Genesis and the Table of Nations. Josephus also connected people in his day to those mentioned in the Table of Nations with much agreement with other historians like Herodotus. He specifically mentions Scythian as being Magogians (descendants of Magog, son of Japheth, son of Noah). Another historian, Strabo, a Greek, mentions the Gogarians. Scholars believe the name Gogarian is a variant of Gog. This people occupied what is southern Russia, Georgia, and Armenia (or thereabouts). Numerous historians from various time periods referenced these people and this land, hinting at their ancestral line going to Magog. Even the name of the nation of Georgia is most likely a variant of Gogarene.
There is so much more to write about Japheth and his descendants, but there just isn't enough time or space for that. I will end this section with a paragraph quote from Tom Osterholm's writing on the subject:
“Early history shows that the Japhethites split into two groups. One group settled in the region of present day India and Central Asia, and the other group in the European theater. Indo-European languages originate from those people groups who migrated through western Eurasia. Together they form what is known as the ‘Indo-European’ family of nations. Both of these divisions trace their ancestry back to Japheth. For example, early Aryans knew him as Djapatischta (chief of the race), Greeks referred to him as Japatos, East Indians called him Jyapeti, Romans called him Jupiter, the Saxons perpetuated his name as Iafeth subsequently transliterated as Sceaf (pronounced sheef or shaif and recorded his name in their early genealogies as the son of Noah, the forebearer of their various peoples), and the variant Seskef was used by early Scandinavians. All of these peoples, we must remember, were pagans whose knowledge or even awareness of the book of Genesis had been lost or was non-existent.”
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
As we continue our look at the Table of Nations, the Tower of Babel, and where people groups come from today, I wanted to touch on how this list of people is connected to the people groups of the world. There are some extra-biblical resources we can draw from here. As I stated in my last blog post, there are a great number of people and people groups listed in Genesis 10-11 and some of them we have no knowledge of other than what the Bible tells us. However, that was true for many more people groups in the not too distant past. There have been several groups unknown to us save the Bible's reference to them until finds in the area where they allegedly lived reveals that, once again, we see the Bible is accurate. Let's take a look at a few of these people groups, though there are just too many for us to investigate all of them fully.
One amazing resource to view on this topic is the ancient historian Josephus. He was a Jewish man charged with writing a history of the Jewish people for his Roman captors. What's amazing is how he beautifully connects many of the people groups mentioned in Genesis 10-11 with people groups that lived around him at the time of his writings. What an excellent resource and an excellent confirmation of Biblical history.
Josephus frequently relates the land area the people settled in, who their founder was (which generally corresponded to the name of the people), and their Greek name if it was different. For example, the Canaanites were descendants of Canaan, Israelites were descendants of Israel, Elamites were descendants of Elam, Cushites were descendants of Cush, etc. He references Japheth and his sons as well. Japheth’s son Gomer founded the Gomerites, and Josephus says they are now called by the Greeks the Galls. These, if you recall, are who Paul wrote to in his letter called Galatians. Japheth's son Magog founded the Magogites, who were known by the Greeks as “Sythians.” Japheth's son Madai was the founder of the Medes. The Medes are known for their part in the Medo-Persian Empire and are now commonly referred to as Iranians. Javan, another of Japheth's sons, was the founder of the Greeks and later the Britons. I'll discuss the history of that and a larger area in more detail further down in this writing. Thiras was the founder of the “Thracians” who are now represented in Scandinavia. Egyptian writings from as early as 1300 BC reference these people, calling them the Tarusha. The Greek historian Herodotus also mentions them. He wrote about 425 BC. From the name Thiras, the Norse people took the name “Thor” and worshiped him as a god. I'll touch more on that later as well.
Now Gomer's son Ashkenaz was the founder of the Ashkenazians. These are now known as the Germans. It stands to reason, possibly, that the Angles and the Saxons (commonly known together as the Anglo-Saxons) migrated to Britain and became part of the people from today's Great Britain along with Javan's descendants. England's name comes from the Angles. A son of Javan, Tarshish, founded the Tarshians and the city we know Paul was from—Tarsus. There are many more examples of Japheth's descendants, but, again, I cannot go into great detail with them all. I would like to look further at Britain.
The history of Britain and her ancestors is, to me, very interesting stuff. There are very large amounts of historical documentation supporting the fact that the people of this area—a variety of rival groups who frequently hated each other—independently trace their lineage back to Japheth and/or Noah. These documents predate the Christianization of these people groups. Let's look more closely at this.
There are six different Anglo-Saxon people groups that trace their lineage back to Woden (aka Oden), and we know from very old records that Woden traced his lineage back to Japheth and Noah. The name Japheth in the local languages was Sceaf or Seskef. There are Icelandic, Danish, and Norwegian records going back to Japheth as well, corroborating each other. These genealogies do not perfectly reflect each other. Some include names others do not and so on. However, there are striking similarities and the names that are similar can not only be matched with the Biblical record, but they are in the same order from one people's list to another. These lists all include the infamous Brutus for whom the Island of Britain and its people were named. To me, again, this is all very fascinating. The fact that genealogies extend back to a man named Japheth or Noah in societies that have, seemingly, no connection to the Judeo-Christian faith is striking!
Some argue these genealogies are forgeries. To that, a sort of silly accusation really, I say, “By whom?” What would be the point of all of these diverse people groups, who were frequently rivals or even hated each other, claiming to all trace their heritage back to the same people? And the fact that there are slight differences, to me, helps confirm they were not forged. The fact that some lists end with Japheth (or his local language equivalent) rather than Noah also tells me it wasn't out of some zeal to make the Bible look true by local Christianized people. In fact, as I've stated, these lists predate the Christianization of this area. Many of the people in these lists were noted for their barbarism and their adherence to pagan rituals. Iceland was founded by Vikings. I don't believe anyone would argue that the Vikings, Norwegian or Danish, were Christians, especially at the time of Iceland's colonization. There's really no merit, that I can discover, to such an accusation—that of these lineages being doctored to appear to demonstrate Biblical truth. Are there other people groups that find their heritage going back to Japheth? Yes!
The Miautso Chinese people, who do not consider themselves to be “true” Chinese, are an intriguing find. They once covered much of inland China, but, over time, according to their traditions, were pushed further and further out and into the mountains of the southwest. When Christian missionaries arrived to share the Gospel with them, they were surprised to find a very similar historical account in the Miautso oral traditions to the creation and Flood accounts found in the Bible, including a story about the Tower of Babel. You can find a translation of this oral history here.
The similarities between their traditions and the historical accounts found in God's Word are amazing. They trace their ancestry to a man named “Dirt.” The first man, Adam, has a name that sounds very much like the Hebrew word for “earth” or “ground.” Sounds a lot like dirt, right? “Dirt's” son was Se-teh. In the Bible, Adam's son was Seth. See the similarities? Further down the lineage, we see a man named Lama. This resembles the name of Lamech. Lamech's son, according to the Bible, was Noah. The Miautso name Lama's son as Nuah. This, to me, is remarkable. And Nuah's sons were Lo Shen, Lo Han, and Lo Jah-phu. These names are remarkably similar to Shem, Ham and Japheth. Lo Jah-phu had a son named Go-men which is the Biblical Gomer. They detail how Lo Han's (Ham's) sons were Cusah (Cush in the Bible) and Mesay (Mizraim in the Bible). They also have in their tradition that Lo Shen's (Shem's) sons were Elan (Elam in the Bible) and Nga-shur (Asshur in the Bible who was the founder of the Assyrians). The Miautso go on to say that several of these families that were present in China became the Miautso while a minority intermingled with the invading Chinese. You can read up on the Miautso Chinese here and here or do some of your own digging. The second link there is to a small portion of Bill Cooper's “After the Flood” which I highly recommend. You can read the book in its entirety online here.
There is a great deal more to say on this topic but obviously I can't get into all the details in a short blog post. I recommend reading this paper on Japheth and Britain. You can also check out this link for the lineage to the Swedes.
The evidence here really solidly supports the historical accounts found in Scripture. There are no rebuttals I have found that seem to have any merit at all, and they generally show nothing more than desperation to reject the Biblical account. If these genealogies are correct and they represent the foundations of all the people groups in the world, then this makes the global Flood of Noah's day true history. It also means God hates sin and desires more from us. It also means the lineages found in Scripture can easily trace for us a timeline back to, at the very least, Noah but really just as easily to Adam who was created on day six of the creation week—also necessarily true if the Table of Nations is accurate. God's Word will always prove worthy of the respect and honor it's due.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
by Steve Risner
Today I was hoping to take an introductory look at the famed Table of Nations found in Genesis 10. The Table of Nations stands today as an enormous testament to the truth of the Bible. If you're unfamiliar with this piece of history, read on, and hopefully I can explain a bit. Thanks for reading.
Genesis 10 is amazing; here's the background. God determined that man's thoughts were evil all the time and He was sorry He made him. He decided to destroy all mankind in a worldwide Flood about 4400 years ago (give or take). In all the earth, God found but one man's family that He felt was worth saving to repopulate the earth. The Flood waters rose, but Noah and his wife along with his three sons and their wives survived because their father had received orders from God to build an Ark. I'm sure you know the story. It rained a lot and the entire earth was engulfed in water, killing everything on land and likely rearranging the planet's surface. All (land dwelling animals) that survived were on the Ark—Noah's family and 2 of each kind of land animal. After the waters receded, the Ark rested on the Mountains of Ararat. As the animals and men exited the Ark, God told them to “...be fruitful and multiple and fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1). He said this twice in a short period of time (again in Genesis 9:7), emphasizing its importance, blessing them, and establishing His covenant with them.
However, rather than fulfill this command of God, the descendants of Noah decided to join together and stay in one place, making a great name for themselves. This is the historical account of the Tower of Babel. I'll get into that later, perhaps, but God was not happy with the people and confused their languages so the different families couldn't understand each other. This drove them apart and the descendants of Shem, Ham, and Japheth (Noah's sons) went their separate ways, filling the earth and establishing the nations. The Table of Nations gives us a look at who these descendants were and what people groups they became. Let's take a look further.
The first verse of Genesis 10 says, “This is the account of Shem, Ham and Japheth, Noah’s sons, who themselves had sons after the Flood.” It goes on from there to give us a detailed look at the offspring of these men, and their offspring, and so on. At that time, the time of the dispersion where everyone went their own way, there were 70 different families accounted for in the genealogies listed for us. The heads of these families literally became the founders of all the major people groups in the world today. Of course, over time, some of these groups have been extinguished—either killed altogether or assimilated into another people group, or they've mixed with other groups making a new group, in a sense. But every people group on earth can trace its origins back to these 70 families and, eventually, back to Noah through his sons—Shem, Ham, and Japheth. I think that's remarkable.
Archaeology and anthropology both seem to confirm what is written in these pages for the most part. I'll delve into that in future blog posts, but I say “for the most part” because there are peoples mentioned in the Table that we have no knowledge of. That's okay, of course. As I stated, there have been groups that have been lost through history due to war, wide scale tragedy, or assimilation. But for some of these groups, a great deal of them were unknown to us at all except in the Table of Nations only to have evidence unearthed thousands of years later. I find that strong evidence for the veracity of the text and also for the Bible in general. This is recorded history. It confirms that the Bible is true and also confirms without question the account of the Flood. If it confirms the Flood and the lineages outlined are to be trusted, it then confirms the creation of man—Adam and Eve—and gives us a pretty good look at when this might have happened. And if Adam and Eve were real people, it stands to reason that the previous 5 days of creation are historically accurate as well.
In other words, if the Table of Nations is accurate and true, then the Flood was a real event that was global in its extent. If the Flood was a real event, then all of geology testifies to this and leaves no room for 1) evolution and 2) billions of years. If this is true, then the creation week must have been a real event and we have no excuse for suggesting it's some sort of poetic literature or metaphor or anything else other than an historical account of something that, according to the family histories outlined in the Bible, occurred about 6000 years ago (give or take).
Over the next couple of weeks, I intend to review what the Table of Nations says. I want to explore the origins of the major people groups around the world as well as look at languages and their origins. Have you ever thought about where a language comes from? How is it developed? It's been a bit of a mystery for us if we fail to recognize the truth of Scripture. But if we accept it, we know where language came from as well as where all these groups of people came from. From these groups, we would eventually develop what some (incorrectly I feel) call races of people. A “race” is a subgroup within a species. I feel that immediately builds walls of separation and disunity. We are all members of one race—that being the human race. We have a variety of skin shades, eyes shapes, hair and eye colors, etc. But we are all descended from the same family—from Noah's sons and their wives. We can actually limit the number of our ancestors to 5. That is one man and 4 women. All of the sons of Noah were just that—sons of Noah. So all the children born of his daughters-in-law were his grandchildren. And his sons' mother was Noah's wife. So... 4 women and one man. From there, it is reasonable to believe that all the genetic variety we see around the globe within mankind is from this family.
I hope you'll stick with me as we explore this topic. The Table of Nations is a wonderful proof for the truth of Scripture, especially for the truth of Genesis. It means the Flood happened and was global, and it means the creation week happened about 1600 years previously (give or take). This eliminates the need for deep time or evolution and, in fact, makes them necessarily false. Thanks for reading. I know I've made some big claims in this blog post. I will be supporting those claims over the next couple of weeks. Stay tuned, faithful reader.
This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration. All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved. Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.
