The Ebla tablets, one of the most important archaeogical discoveries of modern times, contain details which confirm a number of the details of Biblical people. Names such as Canaan, Abraham, Saul, Israel, and David have been recognized in the tablets, which date to around 2300 BC. They also contain the oldest reference to Jerusalem, dated to before the time of Abraham (the reference is to Salem, a name from which Jerusalem is derived).
Other details mentioned include Sodom and Gomorrah and a number of other cities of the plains. Even more interesting is that they are noted in the same order as in the Biblical account found in Genesis 14:2 being: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar. Repeatedly critics have ridiculed the idea of the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah and these tablets reveal that they existed even before the time of Abraham.
Another interesting find is the detail of the tribute that was paid by the king of Mari to Ebla after a defeat in battle. Among the payment was 11,000 pounds of silver and 880 pounds of gold. What makes this interesting is how it relates to the tribute money paid to Solomon during his reign. The amount of 10 tons of gold coming to Solomon has been scoffed at as ridiculous (see 1 Kings 10:14 and 2 Chronicles 9:13) when here we have tribute of over half a ton from just one city. This would seem to make the ten tons coming to Solomon as not at all unreasonable given the great difference in size.
Ur, from which Abram left with his father Terah is also mentioned in the Ebla tablets as is Haran.
Click youtube below to watch FREE !
"Rivers In the Desert"
Bible Study Course 199 Pages Send FREE to your address.
Write to: Hebron Church, 25 Carrington Ave, Hurstville NSW Australia 2220
Or Email email@example.com
Or Phone: (02) 9585 9101
"Famous Atheists Last Words Before Dying"...after you watch this 3 min clip you will demand us to rush YOUR FREE 'Rivers In Desert' Book
Click Film Here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fSFGrhsBpM
Those Who Stayed - The San Bushmen
San Bushmen in Deception Valley, Botswana Demonstrating How to Make a Fire Without FlintIan Sewell
So, about 50,000-100,000 years ago, humans left Africa from east Africa near the Red Sea. The same pattern that made us populate Africa, made us populate the world, with groups splitting off and regrouping. The people who hold genetic markers for all of us, for every single living person in the world today, are descendants of those who stayed behind—the original founding colony. Those who hold the fewest genetic markers in common with the rest of us, are those that traveled the farthest, the end result of all those splits, the last wave of adventurers, who split off from groups in east Asia and colonized the Americas and Polynesia.
The people who today hold the most diverse genetic structure in the world are the San bushmen of South Africa. This isn't a new finding, but it confirms the findings of earlier research of mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomes. Thus, the San are likely to be the descendants of the first group who stayed behind, the first group of humans who colonized Africa and then the rest of the world.
The San aren't "older" than any of us, we are all the same time distance from those first colonists, but they are the descendants of those who stayed behind, and not descended from those of us who wandered off. Interestingly, the DNA research is supported by the linguistic research as well.
Sources and Further Information
Tishkoff, Sarah A., et al. 2009 The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans. Science Express. 30 April 2009
All East Asians came from a South African tribe called 'Khoi or San Bushmen' . They are the first humans on the planet according to DNA studies. San Bushmen in South Africa are genetically hybrid of African (Negroid) and East Asian (Mongoloid) genes. They are yellow brown skin with Oriental faces. Their babies have a blue spot at the bottom spine when born, an exclusive trademark of East Asian babies. Many DNA studies showed they are the oldest tribe in the world 100000 yrs.
2 recent genetic studies tried to pin point ONE single location and source of a ONE common ancestor . Instead they found multiple ancient ancestors spread out everywhere in south africa. These means their original population was thousands right from beginning without a single common ancestor.
How can this be ? These issue had frustrated the gene scientists for years. If they are the oldest genetic tribe and they appeared on the scene in thousands right from the beginning without a pair of common ancestor est. 100 000 yrs ago, this would mean they were supernaturally created in south africa ! Why in South Africa ? Fact : The richest gold deposits on the planet Fact : The biggest meteorite crater on the planet 300km wide, Vredefort Crater
If it were a supernatural event, then according to bible, Gold represents the divine nature of Father God. Gold was used in bars and rings for the Tabernacle of God for worship constructed by Moses (Exodus 26:29). Since the meteorite crater was smashed by an Asteroid . This represents Christ the Flying Rock which smashed the kingdoms of the world (Book of Daniel 2:34)
Thus, Gold Deposits = signature of Father God Crater by Asteroid = signature of Son Jesus
This suggests a collaboration between Father God and Son of a project in South Africa, and according to bible Jesus said to his father "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created him; male and female created he them" (Genesis 1:27)
Notice the 'image' was used 3 times to emphasize the fact that you can accurately work out what God the father and Son physical appearance just from human genetic studies.
Genetic studies proved the first humans appeared on the scene were the San Bushman in South Africa where richest gold deposits and biggest crater by Asteroid were positioned as devine signature seals. This confirms the account of creation of first humans in genesis 1:26 "Let us make man in our image" . A collaboration effort between co-creators Father and Son . San Bushmen reflect the image of co-creators Father and Son, and we know San Bushman is half Negro and Mongoloid DNA. Since we already know Jesus is Negro then the Father must be Mongoloid East Asian . Hence, God of the Bible is Mongoloid-Oriental. This is why 50% of San Bushmen have slant oriental eyes. God and Jesus both imparted their DNA to form the unique San Bushman people to reflect their combined 'human image'. This image can either represent the Negroes or East Asians. So if you are East Asian or Negro you should be pleased with your racial identity in the image of co- creators.
Pictures of indigenous San Bushman below ... notice they have yellow brown skin with Oriental features and the baby is light skin!
What about Adam and Eve you may ask ? They were created separatedly 6000 yrs ago in South China Yunnan . The bible is very clear in this regard. In chapter 2:4 onwards of Genesis, 'Lord God' was used CONTINIOUSLY 12 TIMES to indicate only the Father was involved in the creation Garden of Eden and Adam and Eve. Compared to Genesis chapter 1, 'God' said 'Let us make man in our image". This is Jesus the co-creator talking to his father to create San Bushmen in South Africa. They are to subdue and dominate every creature, birds, cattle, fish on earth meaning to kill them for food. This is why San Bushmen do not grow crops and only hunter gatherers only. Whereas Lord God commanded Adam to grow vegetables, herbs and fruits and not to eat meat and to be vegetarian only. 2 Separate creation of humans , first one in Africa 100000 yrs ago, another one in South China 6000 Yrs ago. Adam means red . He was reddish skinned Asian or Negro. Since there was no mention that Adam reflects Lord God's image i.e. East Asian, hence Adam must be a reddish skin Negro.
Genetic analysis finds that modern humans evolved from southern Africa's Bushmen March 9, 2011 By Lisa M. Krieger
A team of Stanford University scientists, using the largest-ever genetic analysis of remote tribal people, have determined that the human family tree is rooted in one of the world's most marginal and primitive people - the Bushmen of southern Africa.
This startling conclusion challenges the long-held assumption of our origins in the East African highlands of Ethiopia and Sudan in East Africa, suggested by "stones and bones" fossil evidence. And it links us to a people who today live on the flat, dry and scrubby edge of the Kalahari Desert - and the outer fringes of society. Speaking in an extraordinary language of tonal clicks, their numbers have dwindled, over time and they languish at the bottom of Africa's caste social system.
"We have to recognize our origins in a kind of hunter-gatherer group that most people today would say (is) much more primitive than we are," said Stanford biology professor Marcus Feldman. "They don't use metal. They live in the toughest kind of environment, with very little water. Their hunting tools are minimal; they have a very-low calorie diet."
But Feldman, who led the team with geneticist Brenna Henn, went on to say, "But they are total geniuses in the bush." Further, he explained, "over tens of thousands of years, we lost the skills they have, that they teach their children. We developed a totally different set of values - with evolution through agriculture - that bypassed these people." To explore the origins of human evolution, the Stanford research team looked inward, at human DNA.
Africans are the most genetically diverse people in the world. But over time, as different populations emigrated from their homeland - splintering into smaller populations within Asia, Europe and the Americas - they carried away only small portions of available diversity. As a result, older original populations have greater genetic diversity, while newer populations have far less. This fact forms the basis of elegant computer-based statistical analyses in the burgeoning field of population genetics. Many other teams have used genetics to track human migrations around the globe - but there has been little study of different populations within Africa. The complete genomes of five southern Africans, including Archibishop Desmond Tutu, were sequenced in February..
Genetic study challenges theory that modern humans came from just one place in Africa
By Daily Mail Reporter|
The theory that modern humans came from one place in Africa has been challenged by new research.
A study showed the Khoe and San peoples of the sub-Sahara are descendents of the earliest diversification event in the history of all humans, some 100,000 years ago.
The findings, involving 220 participants representing 11 populations across southern Africa , revealed around 2.3 million DNA variants per individual, according to the journal Science
Stark landscape: A San bushwoman stands before the vast Sahara desert
Rich genetic data: Two San bushmen on the dunes of Africa's Kalahari desert
This was thought to be due to interbreeding and genetic stratification - non-random mating between groups.
A group of international scientists from Sweden and South Africa conducted the largest genomic study ever among the click-speaking Khoe and San groups.
Researchers estimate that the San populations from northern Namibia and Angola separated from the Khoe and San populations living in South Africa as early as 25,000 -- 40,000 years ago.
Dr Carina Schlebusch, of Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg, told Science: 'There is astonishing ethnic diversity among the Khoe-San group.
Tribe: A young girl and an old woman of the San people
'We were able to see many aspects of the colorful history that gave rise to this diversity in their DNA.'
Many scientists believe modern humans originated from one region in Africa before spreading into Europe and Asia about 60,000 years ago.
Others theorise there were several 'movements' out of Africa.
'It is possible that modern humans emerged from a non-homogeneous group,' said Mattias Jakobsson from Sweden's Uppsala University, one of the authors.
The genetic data also showed how generations of Khoe-San adapted to their environment which involved muscle function, immune response, and UV-light protection.
Farming skills developed and spread across southern Africa with genetic contributions between a southern San group and people in east Africa.
The Science journal reported how researchers focused on signals across the genome of ancient adaptations that happened before the historical separation of the Khoe-San lineage from other humans.
Co-author Pontus Skoglund, from Uppsala, said: 'Although all humans today carry similar variants in these genes, the early divergence between Khoe-San and other human groups allowed us to zoom-in on genes that have been fast-evolving in the ancestors of all of us living on the planet today.'
The study is to be made freely available for future disease-related studies.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2207097/Genetic-study-challenges-theory-modern-humans-came-just-place-Africa.html#ixzz2NeQvsrd4
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Africans’ genes mute on human birthplace
DNA studies fail to locate root of the species
Web edition: September 20, 2012
Print edition: October 20, 2012; Vol.182 #8 (p. 9)
The origin story for Homo sapiens is a messy tale. Rather than emerging from one small population, the human species likely evolved from a dispersed, complex network of groups that mixed and mated with each other, scientists report online September 20 in Science.
The new research is one of the largest genetic studies of southern Africa’s click-speaking hunter-gatherers known as the Khoisan. Sometimes called Bushmen, the Khoisan are the world’s most genetically diverse people and diverged from other populations very early in human history.
The new work dates the genetic split between the Khoisan and the rest of humankind to at least 100,000 years ago, which is in line with other estimates. That’s 55,000 years older than the next branch on the human family tree, when Central African pygmies split off. The researchers also found that the Khoisan divided into a northern and a southern group approximately 35,000 years ago.
But when the scientists looked for genetic clues pointing to where in sub-Saharan Africa humankind began, they couldn’t trace modern groups back to any one region. That suggests early humans came from a highly structured population with genetic exchange between subgroups.
“The complexity of the South African population is the big story,” says Adam Siepel, a computational biologist at Cornell University. “It undermines simpler stories trying to pinpoint a single geographic origin of modern humans.” Previous fossil evidence had suggested East Africa while smaller genetic analyses indicated South Africa.
In the new study, Carina Schlebusch of Sweden’s Uppsala University and colleagues looked at single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs, which are locations in the genetic code where people commonly differ. The researchers surveyed 2.3 million SNPs in 220 individuals from 11 African populations, including seven Khoisan groups. After combining the new data with previously published data, the team assessed four measures of genetic variation to find where in Africa humans originated, but the results didn’t converge on one location.
A paper set to appear in an upcoming issue of Nature Communications reaches similar conclusions. Joseph Pickrell of Harvard Medical School and colleagues analyzed a different set of more than 565,000 SNPs in 187 individuals from 22 African populations. Like Schlebusch’s team, Pickrell’s group identified a split within the Khoisan that occurred roughly 30,000 years ago, breaking the population into a northwestern and a southeastern group. Their work also failed to find a single area where humans arose.
But you wouldn’t necessarily expect to find the cradle of humanity by looking at the evolutionary relationships of present-day Africans, says Sarah Tishkoff, a human geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. “When you look at modern populations, you see where they live today,” she says. “You don’t know where they were 50,000 or 60,000 years ago.”
Schlebusch’s team also searched for genetic changes that might reveal the evolutionary forces that shaped early Africans. The researchers found hints that selection acting on a few genes related to skeletal and neurological development may have played a role in the emergence of anatomically modern humans. That makes sense, says anthropologist John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin–Madison: “They confirm selection on a gene that differs between modern humans and the Neandertals, RUNX2, which may be involved in the unique physical form of our species relative to archaic humans.”
More extensive analyses that examine the complete genetic instruction book of people from different Khoisan groups are needed to confirm such findings, Tishkoff says. So far, scientists have only done this for one Khoisan man.
“We’re just at the beginning of understanding modern human history and origins in Africa,” Tishkoff says. “In the future, as we do more whole genome sequencing, it will become clearer.”
Facts on Tithing
by Pastor Ken Lawson
Print This Article
- The English word “tithe” as well as its Hebrew-Greek equivalents “ma`aser” and “apodekatoo” means a tenth.
- Many Christian churches preach tithing as a means of supporting the work of the Lord today. There are many variations of this theme. Some pay the local church one tenth of their income after taxes and bills are paid; some pay before. Others demand tithing on unemployment, inheritance, gifts, tax refunds, social security and even gambling winnings. The tithing issue has caused a great deal of strife and division in our churches over the years.
- The most well known passage on tithing comes from the Old Testament book of Malachi 3:7-10. This Scripture has given rise to the practice of “Storehouse Tithing.” Simply stated, the congregation is exhorted from the pulpit to channel all of their Christian giving through the local church (storehouse). If they wish to give to a Christian organization, radio or television broadcast, etc., it must go through their denominational machinery in order for the local church to get “credit.” Also the pastor and elders often must make the determination if the cause supported by the giver is “worthy.”
- This use of the Malachi passage is a good example of Scripture being taken out of its historical and dispensational context. “This whole nation” in verse 9 is the backslidden nation of Israel, NOT the present day church (Malachi 1:1; 3:6). They were under the law of Moses as a system of conditional blessing. Believers today are not under the law but under grace (Romans 6:14). As such we have already been blessed by God with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ (Ephesians 1:3) and are under a system of unconditional blessing with grace on the throne (Romans 5:21).
- This should put an end to the common charge that believers who don’t tithe are “robbing God” and will be “cursed with a curse.” The storehouse mentioned in verse 10 is not a local church but a storage bin or silo in the Jewish temple where the grain from the Hebrew’s tithes was stored (2 Chronicles 31:4-12).
- Under the law only agricultural products were tithed. They included grain, fruit, and livestock. Only products produced within the boundaries of the land of Israel were to be tithed. Jews living in Gentile lands were exempt (Leviticus 27:30-34).
- Others exempt from the tithing law included the hired hands, fishermen, miners, lumber workers, construction workers, soldiers, weavers, potters, manufacturers, merchants, government workers, and priests. In short, all who were not farmers were exempt.
- A farmer with only 9 cattle did not tithe because the law specified the “tenth which passeth under the rod.” Likewise a farmer with 19 sheep paid only 1 sheep to the Lord’s tithe.
- The Jewish farmers in the land could redeem (buy back) the tithes of their crops with a penalty of one fifth. In other words, if a farmer wishes to keep his tithe of grain worth $1,000, he could pay the cash equivalent of $1,200 (Leviticus 27:31).
- Livestock could not be brought back nor could the farmer exchange a good animal for a bad one or vice versa. Any attempt to substitute any other animal other than the tenth which passed under the rod would be penalized by the farmer forfeiting both the tenth and its substitute (Leviticus 27:33).
- God ordained the Levites to be the ones to whom the tithe was paid (Numbers 18:21). They were one of the 12 tribes of Israel to whom no inheritance was given in the land. The Lord Himself and the tithes of the children of Israel was their inheritance. It was used for the service of the tabernacle (later the temple) (Numbers 18:20-28).
- It was unlawful for anyone outside of the tribe of Levi to receive the tithe, such as prophets, preachers, kings or evangelists.
- The Levites paid one tenth of their tithes to the high priest. Not all Levites were priests but only the sons of Aaron. The priests did not tithe.
- The Lord Jesus Christ did not ask for or receive a tithe for support of His ministry. Being of the tribe of Judah (not Levi) He could not without breaking the law (Hebrews 7:14; Revelation 5:5).
- Neither Peter (not of the tribe of Levi) nor Paul (of the tribe of Benjamin) could receive tithes for the support of their ministries.
- Even the Jews do not practice tithing today because there are no Levites, priests, or temple worship in Jerusalem. Jewish rabbis know biblical law well enough to know that tithing under the present circumstances is unlawful. According to them, when the temple is rebuilt in Jerusalem with a consecrated altar with priests and Levites officiating, all Jews living within the biblical tithing zones will tithe.
- Some Christian ministries today continue to support tithing, using the argument that it predates Moses and the law. But this reasoning is not valid, for the Sabbath also predates the giving of the law (Exodus 16:23-29) and yet it is not binding on God’s people today (Romans 14:5,6; Galatians 4:9,10; Colossians 2:16,17).
- Abraham gave tithes to Melchisedec, king of Salem, but this was the spoils of war, not the legalistic tithe of the land which Moses commanded. Also, God did not command the tithe, Abraham chose to give it of his own free will (Genesis 14:17-23; Hebrews 7:1-10).
- The only other scriptural reference to tithing before Moses is Jacob. Again there is no command to tithe. In fact Jacob puts up numerous conditions to be met before he will pay the tithe to the Lord (Genesis 28:20-22).
- The biblical references which address the tithing issues are: Genesis 14:20; 28:22; Leviticus 27:30-32; Numbers 18:20-28; Deuteronomy 12:6,11,17; 14:22,23,28; 26:12; 2 Chronicles 31:5,6,12; Amos 4:4; Malachi 3:8-10; Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42; 18:12; Hebrews 7:5-9.
- Paul the apostle to the Gentiles for this present dispensation of Grace does not mention tithing but says a great deal about Christian giving. Romans 15:25,26; 1 Corinthians 9:7-14; 16:1-3; 2 Corinthians chapters 8 & 9; Galatians 6:6-10; Philippians 4:10-19; 1 Timothy 5:9-18.
WHO is to give to the Lord’s work? The Christian! He gives systematically, sacrificially, and joyfully. TO WHOM does he give? To Christ! FOR WHAT does he give? For the cause of Christ! NOT to a man or to a church, not for gain, but for the Gospel.