7 Comments

I'm so glad I watched that video! I just don't understand its relevance to our day? And is there a connection to matriarchal bloodlines, which usurp patriarchal ones? If so, perhaps there's a relevance to us today and future?

Expand full comment

Hello Svana. I think the relevance is that our civilization is undergoing a crisis for the institution of marriage. We are not alone. We are not the first. Noah went through the same crisis, and Abraham was the victory over that crisis.

Expand full comment

Ah, I see, thank you. God brought me here to grow my understanding His reasons for my burden for the marriage institution. It is comforting to know that the remnant of families will survive this dark season in our primitive age.

Expand full comment

Regarding matriarchal versus patriarchal bloodlines... Yes, they exist. And in Noah's family, Naamah, was, I believe, trying to revive her father's bloodline, or at least his worldview, through Nimrod. However, she failed at that endeavor.

Our male lines all go back to Noah. Our female mitochondrial lines all go back to Naamah. God saved both Seth and Cain through the Flood. I do not believe it means that some bloodlines are evil. I believe it means that God intended to save the representatives of all the bloodlines.

So, yes, Naamah offered herself up to the evil one to achieve her own brand of vengeance upon Yahweh. But Yahweh saved her descendants that came from her champions Cush and Nimrod. The Ethiopian Eunuch brought the Gospel to the line of Cush. Yahweh defeated His enemies by saving their children. That is the God we serve.

Expand full comment

You’ve put on a rabbit trail with Naamah, ha, ha!

Expand full comment

In the previous articles of the Euhemerism series did you speak about Noah leaving for a while? Having Canaan already born does seem like a strong position to take from the text. Since you cited it in this article, does Jubilees speak to this?

Also, I wanted to ask if there could be the possibility of the Jews taking on a novel view of the castration through outside influence, rather than an original view that points to the same original source for Noah and Ham, and Ouranos and Kronos.

Maybe you did speak more about this in previous posts in the series, which aren't available for me to revisit (this isn't a complaint about a pay wall but rather a comment on the fact I can't double check).

Expand full comment

Hello Anthony. I covered that in both the Euhemerus series, as well as the idea that the patriarchs were exploring the world while one stayed behind to care for the women in first two chapters of the Atlantis series.

Canaan already born is a strong position to take from the text, but it is also the only position that enables Noah to pronounce the curse as soon as he awoke. That being said, I am also OK with Heiser's position that the curse was pronounced some time later.

In short, we can speculate and we can estimate what happened, but we will never be absolutely certain we have the right scenario.

Expand full comment