Mary's Perpetual Virginity and Authority

 

    

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Mary was a virgin in two senses. She was a temple-dedicated Virgin, a custom among the Hebrew priests. Remember Elkanah and Hannah dedicated Samuel to the temple. It was a common practice. Hebrew daughters who served at the temples are described in the Old Testament as women who "watch (צָבָא) at the door of the tabernacle.” Exodus 38:8 states that the laver of copper and its stand of copper were made “from the mirrors of the women who performed tasks at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting” (Hebrew Study Bible, p. 197).

Psalm 68:25 refers to temple women as musicians. "The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels.” In the King James, the temple virgins are called "damsels" but the Hebrew word that appears there is alamot. The duties of the alamot included baking bread, brewing beer, weaving, sewing, drawing water, singing, and playing musical instruments such as the sistrum and the timbrel, a type of tambourine. 

Mary, the Mother of our Lord, is designated “almah” in the Scriptures. The word almah (עַלְמָה) is derived from a verb meaning “to conceal” or “to hide away”. Temple virgins were “alamot” because they were cloistered until they married. In Antiquitates judaicae, the historian Flavius Josephus (c.37-100 AD) refers to the cloisters in Book XV, Chapter 11.

It helps to understand the social structure of the Hebrew ruler-priests. According to that society, a temple-dedicated virgin was a high-status bride and usually a patrilineal cousin. As the cousin bride (a second wife), she was not expected to produce an heir. Joseph's heir was his firstborn son by his first wife. Temple-dedicated virgins such as Mary might marry but depending on the vow made at their dedication, the husband might never have sexual relations with her. Certainly, a righteous man such as Joseph would have honored Mary's vow. The Hebrew took sacred vows very seriously.

Hathor, the mother of HR. HR in Ancient Egyptian means Most High One.

To deny Mary's uniqueness is to deny the central miracle of our faith: that she conceived by divine overshadowing (Luke 1:35) just as her Hebrew ancestors anticipated. In their images this miracle is depicted by the sun over the head of HR's mother because the sun was the symbol of the High God for the early Hebrew. 

In the Church, Mary's conception of the Son of God is depicted by an overshadowing dove, a symbol of the Holy Spirit. Both depictions speak of the fulfillment of the first Messianic reference in the Bible: Genesis 3:15. In Joos van Cleve's painting above, The Annunciation c. 1525, a dove hovers above the Virgin Mary. The dove represents the Holy Spirit by whose divine power Mary conceived.

Other images of the Virgin Mary show her holding a spindle, a very early sign of authority among royal women. The spindle symbolized the rabitu's authority. Rabitu was a title for ladies who served as royal officials at Bronze Age water shrines. The term is related to an Ancient Egypt word bity, a reference to the king’s presence in the royal palace. The term also is related to the Akkadian words for water (raatu) and house/shrine (biitu). In the Ugaritic story of Elimelek, the queen mother holds the title rabitu and her emblem is the spindle.

Related reading: Fertility and Water Shrines; The Earliest Known Site of Horite Hebrew Worship; The Influence of Early Hebrew Women; Gender Balance of the Hebrew Social Structure; Solar Imagery of the Proto-Gospel; The Authority of Queen Mothers

Fertility and Water Shrines

 

Hieroglyph for fresh water among the Nilotes.

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Water is universally perceived as a substance necessary for life, and in the ancient world, women visited water shrines to offer prayers for fertility. Water shrines could be at rivers, lakes, wells, or oases. They might be a ritual bathhouse such as the mikveh with stationary waters and a percentage of water from a natural source such as a lake, river, sea, or rain.

The Jewish actress Abbe Feder endured a harrowing, six-year journey to motherhood. Months of disappointment and repeated miscarriages left her spiritually and emotionally depleted. A Jewish friend suggested that she might find relief by frequenting a mikvah, a ritual bath. Abbe had never considered going to the mikvah as a treatment for infertility, but she tried it and eventually she conceived twins. She does not think of the mikvah as a magical treatment, but she admits that repeated visits brought her relief.

Sacred pools are mentioned in the New Testament as places of healing. Jesus sent "a man blind from birth" to the pool of Siloam to complete his healing (Jn 9). John 5:2 gives an account of Jesus healing a paralyzed man at the pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem. These public bathing places were reserved for men, and women had their own more private locations.

The anthropologist Bronislaw Malinoski observed that women of the Trobriand Islands associated conception with sacred pools. Archaeologists found fertility offerings in Tuscany near hot springs reputed for their restorative powers. These fourth century BC offerings had the shape of newborn babies, wombs, penises, and breasts buried in the mud at the bottom of the pools. The offerings suggest that thermal baths were particularly associated with aid in fertility and the health of infants.

In the West African country of Gambia, women hoping to bear children visit the sacred pools of Katchikaly in Bakau and Folonko in Kartong. They go there to pray, drink the water, and wash themselves with the holy water. The women make offerings of salt, sugar, kola nuts, and white candles to the old ladies who guard the pools. Often the visitors take some of the sacred water with them when they leave.


Water Shrines at the Royal Sun Temples

The veneration of the sun as a symbol of the High God was well developed by 3200 BC, as is evidenced by at least 6 sun temples. Among them were the sun temples of Niuserra at Abu Ghurab, the Userkaf Sun Temple, and the Sun Temple at Heliopolis. Heliopolis, which means the “City of the Sun,” was one of the oldest cities on the Nile River. It was occupied since the Predynastic Period (c. 6000 – 3000 BC) and predates the emergence of Egypt as a political entity.

By 3000 BC, the veneration of the sun had received royal patronage. Over the centuries, temples, shrines, and royal complexes were dedicated to it. The wives and daughters of kings ministered to women at the sun city water shrines. Asenath is an example. She lived at Heliopolis, one of the most prestigious sun cities of the ancient world. In Heliopolitan cosmology the watery realms above and below (the "firmaments") were connected by the massive pillars of the temple of Heliopolis. Heliopolis is mentioned in Isaiah 19:18 as one of five Egyptian cities that swore allegiance to the Lord of Hosts.

Royal Sun cities emerged in many parts of the ancient world, especially from the Fifth Dynasty (2465-2323 BC). The temples were oriented so that the rays of the rising sun would shine through the east-facing entrances. The sun also shone on the purification pools. Today we know that solar radiation can purify water.

The sun city water shrines were for purification and healing and the work of the Hebrew ruler-priests caste was connected to rites of water purification, healing, and prayers for fertility of land, beasts, and women. In their worship, the Nilotes associated water and the sun as purifying agents. Exodus 7:15 speaks the custom of the Pharaoh in the early morning to come down from his palace to the Nile River to pray and worship the High God whose emblem was the sun.

Related reading: The Influence of Early Hebrew Women; Hebrew Ruler-Priests at the Ancient Sun Cities; The Ministry of Hebrew Woman at the Sun Cities

 

The Feminist Critique Fails

 

Dr Alice C. Linsley

How seriously should readers of the Bible take the Feminist critique? 

Feminists point to isolated situations in the Bible to assert patriarchal oppression and the exploitation of women. One of their favorite examples is the story of Dinah whose brothers Levi and Simeon used her rape as an excuse to murder the men of Shechem. They also point to Laban who used a promise of marriage to his daughters to extract 14 years of menial labor from his nephew Jacob. The sexual abuse of the Levite's concubine is another favorite example of feminist interpreters. It initiated a war on the clan of Benjamin (Judg. 19–21). Note that these narratives serve ultimately to justify men plotting violence against men. 

Other than these examples, there is little evidence in the Bible that Hebrew fathers exploited their daughters for personal gain. Exodus 21:32 states that a father could demand damages for an injury done to a daughter. Deuteronomy 22:19 states that a father was entitled to damages for slander of the good name of his daughter. These laws provided protection to Hebrew daughters.

Feminists also point to the story of Jephthah’s daughter as an example of a father exploiting his daughter. However, a closer look at the details of that narrative suggest that the father and his daughter colluded to prevent her marriage to hostile kinsman.

Hebrew fathers sometimes denied marriage opportunities to their daughters. The accounts of marriage being denied to daughters reveals a great deal about the political, social, and religious concerns of Hebrew rulers. Some Bible scholars believe that Jephthah dedicated his daughter to God’s service to avoid giving her in marriage to the son of one of his brothers.

Jephthah’s father Gilead had two wives. The sons of Gilead’s principal wife drove Jephthah away. "You are not going to get any inheritance in our family," they said, "because you are the son of another woman." (Jdg. 11:2) Jephthah became a sent-away son.

As with other sent-away Hebrew sons, Jephthah became a great warrior. He led his men in a successful battle against the Ammonites. After the battle, he vowed to offer to God “whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me” (Jdg. 11:30). Had he seen a sheep, goat or a cow, he would have sacrificed that creature to God. It is strange, given this was a farming society, that no livestock were in sight upon his return. Instead, as if on cue, his daughter came running to meet him.

The story of Jephthah’s daughter is sometimes cited as an example of child sacrifice, yet the text states only that she was to be dedicated to God. That usually meant that the child would be dedicated to the temple or shrine. Jephthah’s vow helped him avoid giving his daughter in marriage. By dedicating her to God’s service, Jephthah saved face and avoided open refusal of his daughter's hand in marriage.

It is likely that Jephthah’s daughter was privy to the scheme because it is she who insisted that he fulfill his vow to God (Jdg. 11:36). She may have wished to follow the career of her paternal grandmother, a temple woman who after leaving the temple, operated an inn like Rahab. She is inaccurately described as a “prostitute” in Judges 11. The Hebrew word for that appears here is zonah which can refer to an inn keeper. Some inn keepers were formerly temple women. As that is a position passed from mother to daughter, Jephthah’s daughter could opt for a life in the temple instead of marriage to someone she did not wish to marry.

By giving up worldly aspirations, perhaps Jephthah’s daughter hoped to be chosen to bring forth the promised Messiah. It was long believed that the mother of the Messiah would be a temple woman who would conceive by divine overshadowing. Sargon hoped to garner more power by shaping opinion according to this expectation. He claimed that he did not have an earthly father and that his mother conceived him while in the temple at Azu-pir-Anu.

No doubt, Hebrew daughters were both an asset and a challenge to their families. The marriage of high-status daughters brought riches to the bride’s family in the form of dowries. However, some men were more interested in advancing their social position than in forming a good marriage. Hebrew fathers could deny marriage to suitors if the marriage put their families at a political disadvantage or if it jeopardized inheritance (cf. Ruth 4:6). The fact that Hebrew daughters could opt for a life of service to God by being dedicated to the temple or shrine, means that they had more power over their lives than Feminists would have us believe.

One of the stated objectives of Feminists is to achieve equality between the sexes through social activism and legislation. Yet Feminism is premised on an unswerving belief in universal inequality. Would Feminists be content were they to finally achieve universal equality between the sexes? Not likely. To exist, Feminism needs inequality and instances of unfairness to women.

Feminist interpretations of the Bible reveal selective reading, and a mindset that is blind to the authority balance of males and females in the Bible.

The social structure of the biblical Hebrew was neither patriarchal nor egalitarian. It reveals a binary balance of authority between males and females. This balance reflects the binary reasoning of the biblical Hebrew and is evident in many biblical narratives. There were male prophets and female prophets, male rulers and female rulers; inheritance by male heirs and inheritance by female heirs, patrilocal residence, and matrilocal residence; and Hebrew patronymics and Hebrew matronymics. In the Hebrew double unilineal descent pattern, both the patrilineage and the matrilineage are recognized and honored, but in different ways. The Hebrew persons named in Genesis acknowledge both female and male ancestors (cognatic descent). The blood on the doorposts in Egypt by which the Hebrew households were saved from death has a counterpart in the story of Rahab's scarlet cord by which her household was spared.

The balance of authority between Hebrew men and women is evident in the New Testament narratives also. When Jesus was presented in the temple His identity as Messiah was attested by the priest Simeon and the prophetess Anna. Men and women are among Jesus’ followers. The women reportedly provided many of the material needs of Jesus and the Disciples. Jesus restored life to Jairus’ daughter (daughter to father) and life to the son of the widow of Nain (son to mother). Jesus’ parables in Luke 15 involve a male seeking a lost sheep and a female seeking a lost coin. Paul commends both men and women to the Gospel ministry. Among them are Apollos, Priscilla, and Phoebe, a leader from the church at Cenchreae, a port city near Corinth. Paul attaches to Phoebe the title of prostatis, meaning a female patron or benefactor.

An unbiased approach to the Scriptures confirms the balance of authority between males and females. It considers the bigger picture and those who hope to understand the Bible must look at the bigger picture.

Related reading: Hebrew Rulers with Two Wives; Sent-Away Sons; Orthodoxy Requires Binary Reasoning; Time to Jettison the Marxist-Feminist Hermeneutic, Is "Male Headship" a Biblical Doctrine?; The Influence of Hebrew Wives; The Myth of Western Patriarchy; Are Feminists Correct About the Church?

NOTE: Binary Reasoning: The reasoning of the biblical Hebrew which informs their worldview, social structure, moral codes, and ethics. They perceived "binary sets" in the order of Creation. The primary sets are Creator-Creature, Life-Death, Male-Female, and Sun-Moon. It is evident from observation and experience that one entity of the binary set is greater in visible ways than its opposite. The Creator is greater than the creature. Life is greater than death. The Sun is greater than the Moon (Gen. 1:16). Males are larger and stronger than females. (See Binary Reasoning Informs Christian Morality and Ethics, Levi-Strauss and Jacques Derrida on Binary Oppositions)

Get to Know the Biblical Hebrew!

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

An important feature of the Hebrew social organization was their moiety structure. They were organized into two separate ritual groups (moieties), and it is clear from the biblical data that the moieties associated with one of the Hebrew ancestors more than the other. 

The Kenite and Midianite metalworkers associated with Cain/Kain whose descendant Tubal-Cain is described as a metal worker in Genesis 4.

The Sethite Hebrew associated with Seth who appears to have been a deified Nilotic ancestor, as is suggested by the discovery of Seth images at Nekhen on the Nile, the earliest known Hebrew site.

The two moieties helped each other but were often in competition. Descriptions of the Horites and Sethites are plentiful in ancient texts such as the Ancient Pyramid Texts (2400-2200 BC). These descriptions indicate that the Horites and the Sethites maintained separate settlements. Utterance 308 addresses them: "Hail to you, Horus in the Horite Mounds! Hail to you, Horus in the Sethite Mounds!"

The more prestigious Hebrew settlements were those of the Horites. These were at a higher elevation that those of the Sethite Hebrew. Utterance 470 of the Ancient Pyramid Texts contrasts the Horite mounds with the mounds of Seth, designating the Horite Mounds "the High Mounds."

The Hebrew married only members of their royal priest caste. Marriage between members of the moieties strengthened the Hebrew identity. and preserved the caste's wealth. For example, the lineages of Cain and Seth are linked by a pattern of recurrent marriage between the numerous Horite and Sethite clans.

Bride exchange between the descendants of two brothers such as Cain and Seth, or Ham and Shem, was a common practice among the Hebrew. The diagram above shows that Naamah, a descendant of Cain, married her cousin Methuselah, a descendant of Seth. The Horite and the Sethite moieties were bound together by the exchange of high-status women between the Hebrew clans.

Cousin brides were especially important links between the Horite and Sethite Hebrew clans. The Hebrew men who ruled over territories maintained two wives in separate settlements. The firstborn son of the first wife ruled over the territory after his father died. The firstborn son of the cousin wife was sent to serve the household of his maternal uncle. Jacob was sent to serve his maternal uncle Laban. Likewise, Joseph went to serve his maternal uncle Potiphar in Egypt.

Other sons who were sent away include Cain whose descendants the Kenites were living in Canaan, which is כנען, pronounced kena'an. Moses served his maternal uncle Jethro in Midian (avunculocal residence). The practice of sending away non-ascendant sons is mentioned in Genesis 26. Abraham gave gifts to his sons and sent them away from his proper heir Isaac. 

The custom of sending away non-ascendant sons drove the Hebrew dispersion out of the Nile Valley well before the time of Abraham (c. 2000 BC).

Applying kinship analysis to the biblical texts makes it possible to detect the historical realities behind Jewish midrash. Certain literary devices are used to develop the Jewish narrative. One is the device is jealousy among brothers. Though the Genesis story does not explain why Cain killed Abel, midrash supplies the explanation that he was jealous. Likewise, Joseph’s treatment by his brothers is explained as an act motivated by jealousy.

Midrashim often employ the device of slavery to explain why a prominent Hebrew is not living in Judah, Israel, or the land of Canaan. It is used to explain why Joseph was in Egypt, why Daniel was in Babylon, and why Mordecai and Esther were in Persia. In the sixth century BC, many Judean noblemen were taken to Babylon, and Babylon was conquered by the Persians who took captives to Susa. These events have been historically verified. Midrash often embroiders historical events to convey a theological message.

Related reading: The Hebrew Were a Caste; Competition Between the Horites and the Sethites; Why Nekhen is Anthropologically Significant; Royal Sons and Their Maternal Uncles; Literary Motifs of Jewish Midrashim; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew

The Historical Mary: What We Know

 

Dr Alice C. Linsley

Each year as Christmas approaches films appear with a Biblical theme. This year, Netflix has a movie about Mary, the mother of Jesus. I have not watched the film, but I suspect that Mary will be portrayed as a young unmarried mother of Palestine who did not know what was happening to her. I hope to set the record straight since information about Mary and her priest ancestors is available. 

The Biblical and historical data that helps us to understand Mary's social status is extensive. Even those who held her in low regard had to admit that she was a descendant of kings and governors. Concerning Mary, Sanhedrin 106a says: “She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters.”

The marriage of Mary of Bethlehem and Joseph of Nazareth represents an endogamous marriage pattern. The Hebrew married only members of their caste. Their marriage represented the connection between the priestly order of Abijah in Bethlehem and the priestly order of ha·pi·TSETS (Happizzez) in Nazareth. Abijah was the eighth priestly division and Happizzez was the eighteenth division. During the time of Mary and Joseph, the twenty-four priestly divisions served in the Temple at Jerusalem in a rotation system. A list of priestly divisions is found in 1 Chronicles 24:7-18. However, this system was already in place among the early Hebrew priests of the Nile Valley. During the Predynastic period (c.4000-3000 BC) and the Old Kingdom (c. 2575-2130 BC), the Hebrew priests of the Nile Valley were organized into "phyles". Each phyle served a two-week duration before returning home. The later organization of priests in Israel appears to have developed from the phyle system.

Mary was a descendant of the Hebrew ruler-priests who married only within their caste. When Joseph took Mary as his second wife, he was marrying a temple-dedicated virgin of high status. Her high status is depicted in some icons that show her holding a spindle.

The Virgin Mary holds a spindle, the symbol of a Rabitu, a Bronze Age title for a queen mother.

It is likely that Mary was dedicated to the Temple by her parents, as was Samuel dedicated by his parents Hannah and Elkanah. The duties of the Temple virgins included singing and playing musical instruments such as the sistrum and the tambourine. They ministered to women who came for ritual purification. The women performed practical tasks such as drawing water, baking bread, and brewing beer. They were skilled weavers who produced veils and vestments. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew describes how Mary and the other Temple virgins were spinning purple thread in the Women's compound when the Angel Gabriel appeared to Mary. 

Mary is designated almah in the Scriptures. The Hebrew word almah (עַלְמָה) is derived from a verb meaning “to conceal” or “to hide away”. Temple virgins were alamot because they were cloistered until they married. In Antiquitates judaicae, the historian Flavius Josephus (c.37-100 AD) refers to the cloisters in Book XV, Chapter 11. The King James Version refers to the alamot as “damsels”. The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels. (KJV, Psalm 68:25)

Some temple-dedicated virgins chose not to marry. Entering the service of the Temple made that choice possible. Some daughters were denied marriage for political reasons. Some were released from their vows and returned to their fathers' houses. Some who were released, married. Depending on the vow, some who married remained celibate. This was the case mainly with cousin brides who were not expected to produce an heir. As a righteous man, Joseph honored Mary’s vow of celibacy. He already had a proper heir by his first wife.

Mary's conception of Jesus was by divine overshadowing as the Angel Gabriel explained (Lk. 1:35). This is exactly what the early Hebrew anticipated concerning the Son of God, and it is a significant detail of the ancient Messianic mystery. The Magnificat expresses Mary's wonder at being appointed to this unique role, especially because her lineage was deemed unworthy of honor by the Jewish elites after the time of Herod the Great. One of Mary’s ancestors Matthias (Mattat), the 61st High Priest and a descendant of David, was deposed and had limited political influence with the House of Zadok. The ancestral family of Jacob ben Mattat, once a favorite of Herod the Great, appears to have been ostracized from Jewish political life.

That Jesus was the son of Mary is not doubted. He took his flesh from the Virgin Mary, the daughter of Anna and Joachim. As a descendant of the Hebrew ruler-priests who married only within their caste, Mary's bloodline is traceable to the early Hebrew (4000-2000 BC) who expected one of their temple virgins to conceive the Son (HR) by divine overshadowing, exactly as the Angel Gabriel explained to Mary.

Mary's Perpetual Virginity

According to the tradition received from the early Christians and the Church Fathers, Mary was the daughter of a priest named Joachim and his wife Anna. Although Mary’s mother is not mentioned in the Bible, we know of her from other sources. The earliest known record is found in the second century Protoevangelium of James.

 
Mary is believed to have been a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ. This belief, known as the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity, was officially declared at the Fifth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in 553 AD.

Writing in 210 AD, Hippolytus of Rome believed, “But the pious confession of the believer is that . . . the Creator of all things incorporated with Himself a rational soul and a sensible body from the all-holy Mary, ever-virgin, by an undefiled conception, without conversion, and was made man in nature, but separate from wickedness. . .” (Against Beron and Helix: Fragment VIII)

Athanasius wrote in 360 AD against those “who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70).

Writing in 374 AD, Epiphanius of Salamis, affirmed the creedal faith: “We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 120).

Others who believed in Mary’s perpetual virginity include Ambrose of Milan (339-97 AD), John Chrysostom (347-407 AD), Jerome (347-420 AD), and Augustine (354-430 AD). Many Protestant reformers affirmed their belief in the doctrine, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Huldrych Zwingli. In England the belief was held by Hugh Latimer (1487-1555 AD), Thomas Cranmer, (1489-1556 AD), John Jewel (1522-1571 AD), and Lancelot Andrewes (1555-1626 AD).

Related reading: Just Genesis: Another Look at Genesis 3:13-15; The Virgin Mary's Ancestry; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew; Denying Marriage: A Cunning Royal Strategy; BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Temple Women

Competition Between the Horites and the Sethites

Egyptian artifact dating to c. 1970-1878 BC. 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

This Egyptian hippopotamus statuette can be seen in Gallery 111 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. Museum workers regard "William the Hippo" as a mascot. The artifact was found in a shaft associated with the funerary chapel of Senbi the Steward. This 8 in (20 cm) figurine in faience, a clay-less material, illustrates the high level of Egyptian faience work during the Middle Kingdom.

According to the Museum, this hippo figure is a "particularly fine example of a type found, in common with various other animal forms, among the funerary furnishings of tombs of the Middle Kingdom."

William seems a benign creature, almost whimsical. However, hippos can be aggressive and are known to attack. In Job 40:15-24, the hippo is called the "behemoth" and is described as one of God's most dangerous creatures. On ancient Nilotic murals and royal vessels, the early kings are often shown spearing fearsome hippos. Such scenes depict the kings as courageous and able to impose order on chaos. The hippo was the animal totem of Seth and sometimes represented the chaos that could arise when Seth, a deified ruler, asserted equality with Horus, the son of the High God.

The competition between Seth and Horus is found in many Egyptian tales. These tales reflect the competitive relationship between the Sethite and the Horite Hebrew who maintained separate settlements (mounds) along the Nile River before the time of Abraham (2000 BC). 

It is clear in the Ancient Pyramid Texts (2400-2000 BC) that the Horites and the Sethites maintained separate settlements. Utterance 308 addresses them as separate entities: "Hail to you, Horus in the Horite Mounds! Hail to you, Horus in the Sethite Mounds!" 

Though separate groups or moieties, the Horite and Sethite Hebrew shared common religious practices and beliefs, and they worshiped the same God and served the same king. However, the Horite temples and shrines were the more prestigious. Utterance 470 contrasts the Horite and Sethite mounds and designates the Horite mounds as "the High Mounds."

Golden Horus falcon found at Nekhen.

The animal totem of Horus was the falcon, symbolizing flight through the heavenly regions. The falcon was also the totem of the Horite Hebrew who were devotees of Horus (HR). HR in ancient Egyptian means the Most High One. 

The hippopotamus, on the other hand, is a creature of the mud, dust, and clay, suggesting that the mounds of the Sethites were the lower mounds. The elevation of the mounds appears to relate to a hierarchy of authority.

Figures relating to both Seth and Horus have been found at Nekhen on the Nile, the oldest known site of Horite Hebrew worship (4000 BC). This figurine of Seth as a red man with the head of a hippo was found at Nekhen. 

Votive offerings at the Nekhen temple were ten times larger than the normal mace heads and bowls found elsewhere, suggesting that this was a very prestigious shrine.

Related reading: Seth, Son of Adam; Horite and Sethite Mounds; Why Nekhen is Anthropologically Significant; Horus, King of the Universe

Try a more interactive platform!

 

I am sure many people believe this is true of Facebook. I have friends and family members who refuse to use social media entirely. Of course, there are groups that seem to wallow in the mundane, and people whose arrogance and dismissive attitudes drive us away. However, social media is a powerful tool that Christians must learn to use wisely. 

I often say that the churches should teach how to use social media to educate, inspire, encourage, and graciously correct. Sadly, some use social media to sermonize and to deliver a substantial portion of negative judgements. The negativity does not reflect well on people of faith.

There is a tendency to shun those with whom we disagree and to create echo chambers in which we can discuss pet ideas, political leanings, or debate finer points of theology. Personally, I do not find echo chambers to be helpful because I want to hear opposing views, especially if they are well-articulated, and empirically sound.

Recently there has been a sizeable uptick in the number of comments at this blog. I appreciate the thoughtful comments of many readers, and I attempt to respond to all of them. 

However, blogs are not the best interactive platforms. Therefore, I encourage you consider joining the international Facebook group The Bible and Anthropology. The conversations there are fascinating!

Many of the members are respected scholars in Biblical Studies, Archaeology, Comparative Linguistics, Ancient Civilizations, Paleoanthropology, DNA Studies, and Kinship Analysis.

The forum members are respectful, thoughtful, and generous when it comes to differences. We learn from one another. It has been that way since the group began almost 8 years ago. Please take a moment to view the content, and comment to your heart's desire!

I hope your days are full of God's love and a growing confidence in God's promises.

Alice C. Linsley