I would've liked to have written a seminal book on this theory, but I can't take the time from my translation work to do it now. However, the usefulness of such a theory in explaining some major misconceptions in the Old Testament compels me to broach the subject here in an abbreviated form. It needs to be fleshed out more if it's purportedly to become a full fledged theory of Biblical anthropology. I hope visitors to my website will find it thought provoking, worthy of discussion and amplification. Unlike the Theory of Evolution, the Theory of the Aborigine does not see a contradiction between science and the Bible.
I. The Aboriginal Factor.
So far the word "aborigines" has been almost exclusively applied to the Australian Aborigines. I think the word "aborigine" is a useful term and should be expanded in its meaning to apply to all people who have retained their aboriginal qualities despite the encroachments of the so-called civilized world. I would like to redefine this term and utilize it in advancing this theory, the theory of the aborigine, or the Aboriginal Factor.
A. The Biblical Perspective.
In the first chapter of Genesis it's revealed that God created the universe, the earth, the vegetation and the animals. Then in the sixth eon, God created the human being. Genesis 1:27-28: "And God created the human being to resemble His own visage; He created them male and female. And God blessed them and said to them, Multiply and increase, and fill the earth and its environments, and have authority over the fish in the sea and the birds of the sky and the four-legged animals and all the creatures that crawl over the earth."
Thus God created the human being before He created Adam and Eve. Later, it says in Genesis 2:7: "And the Lord God molded Adam from the dust to resemble Himself, and He blew on their faces the breath of life and Adam became a living soul." So God created two human beings, Adam and Eve, and placed them in Paradise. After the serpent, or Satan, deceived them, God ejected them from Paradise. They had fallen from grace. Until then they'd known no sin, because they were not aware of sin. They didn't even know what being naked was, but after they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of the good and the evil, they became aware and fell prey to the temptations of Satan.
Further in my interpretation of Genesis 6:4, it's obvious that there were Neanderthals on the earth "in those ages, and even later, because the sons of God entered upon the daughters of men, and aliens were born to them, who became the giants of eternal fame." The word "alien" is appropriate in the sense of "strange" in the Ancient Aramaic language.
Besides Adam and Eve, then, the evolution of the primates proceeded just as science has discovered, with the various stages in man's development, culminating in the Neanderthal man, and then the homo sapiens. The homo sapiens were the result of the marriage of the Neanderthal man with the children of Adam and Eve. This man is what I call the aborigine.
First God created the aboriginal man and told them to go and multiply. Then in Genesis 4:16, we're told that after Cain killed his brother Abel, he left the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of the nomads, east of Eden. These nomads that Cain intermarried with were the aborigines that were created before Adam and Eve.
In another Scripture, the word for them was "Nephylim," or "the fallen." This is what they were called in the early Jewish tradition. The word in Ashurit or the Ancient Aramaic connotes "aboriginal man." From the modern scientific perspective, the aborigines could be called primates, humanoids or the Neanderthal man. They were essentially animal in nature; however, they had the capacity to think like the homo sapiens that followed them, in the age that God ejected Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, or Paradise.
What ultimately survives of the original Adam and the aboriginal nature of the Neanderthal man is the hybrid human being. Thus after The Flood, Noah's progeny is a mixture of the human being and the aboriginal. Thus all people have the aboriginal nature alongside their human nature. The proportion varies and one of the two becomes dominant, such that, in my view, the anticipation of the Messiah during the Old Covenant days or the acceptance of Jesus as Lord and God in the Christian Era is what transforms the aboriginal man into a wholesome human being. This is the basis of the theory.
The theory of the Aborigine is advanced in the hope of understanding and possibly ameliorating man's savage nature that seems to defy the forces of civilization. Century after century, mankind seems to be headed down the dark tunnel of self-destruction. Can the understanding of the Scriptures shed some light on mankind and prevent his total annihilation?
B. The Scientific Perspective.
Anthropologists have discovered the bones of many generations of ape men that roamed the world as nomads thousands of years before the emergence of the homo sapiens. In recent studies it has been theorized that the homo sapiens must've replaced the Neanderthals. The Neanderthals were, according to some anthropologists, less aggressive and an easy prey for the cleverer homo sapiens. Interestingly, the Neanderthals were taller in stature and stronger. They had a different shaped skull which made it harder for them to run apparently and this lack of ability to run quickly is said to be the reason why they didn't fare well against their predators, both animal and human. However, it may be that the homo sapiens had another different feature of the brain that helped them. The neo-cortex of the human brain is very narrowly connected to the old brain, or the animal brain. This constriction made it possible for the new brain to dominate the old brain and think freely from it and on a much more sophisticated level than the purely instinctual. It's possible also that the Neanderthals, then, had a less differentiated neo-cortex. A good percentage of anthropologists now believe that the two groups intermarried and produced modern man. Or another way to put it would be to say that the homo sapiens absorbed the Neanderthal man. That they were able to reproduce would imply that they were one species to begin with.
C. The Political Perspective.
Modern Biblical scholars, following the European tradition of the Middle Ages, have ignored scientifically gathered evidence, and have tended to treat the Bible as a spiritual book without scientific merit. Most churches treat the Old Testament as a history of Judaism and early Christianity. The only exception to that is some Western evangelists who preach that the Old Testament prophecy is not yet all fulfilled. They cite from the Book of Daniel, for example, about the emergence of world empires and the coming battle of Armageddon, which is also mentioned in Revelation. They ignore the fact that this battle has already taken place. It was called World War Two. Then they allude to certain historical references in the Bible to some events that will unfold along modern political thinking. However, since the Western Bibles are poorly translated from a scientific perspective, they've made a mess of interpreting these events that have already taken place, as well as distorting most of the historical events in the Bible.
One of the examples that we're dealing with today is the basis for the rights of the Jews and Palestinians according to the Book of Genesis. The translations and the interpretations are unfortunately totally wrong. The Book of Genesis has nothing to do with these modern issues. The Old Testament has to do with the prophecy about the coming of Jesus Christ, and all the prophecies of the Old Testament have already been fulfilled. The issue of the Jews and Palestinians today has to be resolved on the basis of what is relevant today. Of course, it's the Christian thing to do, to promote peace between Jews and Muslims, especially as Christians are also involved in the region. Christians should really promote peace at all times.
Most of the problems in the world are due to man's aboriginal nature. Wars may be caused by evil men, but it's the aborigines who fight them. Throughout history, evil men have created the conditions for the kind of war that the aboriginal element cannot resist. Attacks against the homeland must be defended if a nation is to survive. Satan is behind all wars that aim to destroy faithful believers in the Lord. There are no holy wars. Satan works through evil leaders that commit atrocities against innocent people or call for genocides against helpless nations. The aborigines can be made to commit any atrocity as long as it's perceived as a national cause. In immoral, amoral or secular societies, the aboriginal element is controlled by the leaders. If the leader is a moral person, wars can be prevented, atrocities and genocides can be avoided.
The aborigines reject those leaders that do not embody the cultural values that represent their nation's character. A non-aboriginal leader needs to understand what these values are and to emphasize them during national days and in the ceremonies of state if he's to remain a leader. Many leaders have been assassinated because they either abandoned the aboriginal values or were perceived to have lost their touch with the people. In modern times, no leader is elected unless he or she comes from an aboriginal background or adheres to aboriginal values.
An aboriginal leader cannot leave power and survive. He typically remains in power until deposed or killed. There's no place for him to go, like an odd animal rejected by the herd. In contrast to the aborigine-run countries, the Presidents in the US may be elected by the aboriginal element of the population, yet they govern in the name of God. In England the Queen is the Protector of the Faith. These are not just meaningless terms, there's history and Biblical tradition behind them. Therefore, it's preferable for the king or the ruler of each country to be non-aboriginal and for them to draw their authority from God, or if they're aborigines then they hopefully adhere to the ceremonies, rituals and wisdom of their nation's faith. When the leader or ruler of a nation is an aborigine, he or she may be very popular, but they eventually become dictators and they can never bring themselves to relinquish power, unless forced. In other words, it's always best for a king, ruler or president of a country to govern as a servant of God.
Ironically, in a democracy, a president is a public servant. If the public decides that terrorism is a way to win the people's rights against an occupying enemy, then the public servant has no choice but to approve such a strategy. However, if the president is responsible to God first, then this is not an option. Jesus taught his disciples that the greatest leader among them is the greatest servant and vice-versa. So a Christian president, king or ruler must ultimately abide by what the Lord says, not by what the public wants. This is why we have the system that we have in America. The US is not governed by the aboriginal element. A totally secular leadership is disastrous. A President who recognizes his or her dependence on God's grace is essential for the peace and prosperity of the American system.
D. The Cultural Perspective.
The aboriginal man is not a spiritual being; however, every soul figures in the plans of human leaders to establish a territory and to cultivate the land. Therefore, the aborigine is an important element of the population. In fact, the aborigine makes up the most enduring portion of the population, not just the biggest.
The aborigine fights for his culture and even when everything is lost, never gives up, but goes on in search of another place to live and settle. He may change his national name, create a new identity, but inside he's still the same, because he cannot change. He will not give up until he's dead. Historically every major empire was sustained by the aboriginal element of its population, usually the dominant tribes. For example, the Chaldeans emerged out of Babylon, the Aturai out of Mesopotamia, the Greeks out of Ionia, the Iranians out of Persia, and the Italians out of Rome. Notice every one of them changed their name after their empires fell. They were never loyal to the name, except to the survival of their tribe. They were aborigines, led by spiritually endowed human beings. Their true names were Babylonians, Ashurai, Ionians, Persians, and Romans, respectively, but today they all prefer to use their aboriginal names, and that's typical. The same is true of other empires. Some empires had many tribes and coalitions of tribes, but the same phenomenon occurs.
The aborigines prefer their tribal names, because each empire tried to instill a higher order upon their subjects, in order to govern their diverse populations, to have a common system of administration, law, military, education, and religion. In time, this became oppressive and rebellion set in. Eventually, when the empires fell, the various tribes declared their own tribal names. The aborigines are proud of their tribal names. They don't want to be denigrated because of the exploits of their empires, thus they change their names. Some are ashamed of their old heritage and their beliefs. Not being spiritually endowed, the aborigine is more flexible in adopting other religions, traditions and rituals.
The aborigines are like the lemmings in following their instincts, but in their outward migration, fortunately there's no evolutionary cliff from which to fall. So the aborigines survive most catastrophes, go on to re-establish themselves elsewhere, adapt to their new environment and continue to breed. Although sometimes an embarrassment to their cultures in their recalcitrance, the aborigines are the only ones who insure the survival of their kind. Typically, they don't marry outside their ethnicity. The aborigines are always seeking their mate from their own tribe. When abroad, they come home to find their mate, or if they can't, they travel the world over looking for their soul mates.
All nations are predominantly aboriginal in constitution. The Arabs, the Chinese, the Indians and the Africans are also predominantly aboriginal. The aboriginal element in most nations is a big percentage of the population, otherwise the culture has no significant characteristics and usually doesn't survive, in the sense of maintaining its heritage.
E. The Artistic Perspective.
The aborigines are devoted to their language, folklore, arts and crafts. The best writers of any nation portray the speech and habits of their ethnicity in all manner and detail. They study the accents, the traditions, the folklore and gifts of their people and produce works of literature that appeal to the lowest common denominator, and they typically leave artifacts of their culture behind as native history. The success of such works depends on the authentic portrayal and skill of the artist. Popular culture is just that, the promulgation of the accepted, tried and true aboriginal wisdom in everything and the expression of the common heritage at all times.
We're fascinated by the work of such writers as William Faulkner, Ernest Hemingway and Scott Fitzgerald, who portray the dialects of the native born and the immigrants, studying the inflection of their language and the tone of their speech, then using all that to create a uniquely American form of expression.
In movies, the aboriginal element is predominant. Faith in God is not allowed to play a part in the typical drama of a modern movie, for example, because the drama has to be based on human emotion and aboriginal reality, and the construction of modern drama precludes sudden, unexplained happening that have to do with the unseen. Thus everything must be visualized and presented as real, even angels, devils, monsters and every imaginable creature from the spiritual realm. Movies cater to the masses and the majority of the masses are aboriginal.
F. The Religious Perspective.
In the US, the "separation of church and state" laws provide the aboriginal man the freedom to pursue his interests outside the influence of a moral code. Since by definition the aboriginal man has no spirit but was born with a soul, it's natural for him to thrive in the amoral world that's become the essence of democratic societies.
Jesus came to the world as God in the flesh. In other words, He came in human form. He possessed the holy Spirit instead of the soul of the aboriginal man. He made it possible for the aboriginal man to receive the spirit and be converted to a Child of God. That each person who is thus born again is said to have been destined from before the foundations of the universe. Indeed, Adam was destined to be saved and, therefore, restored by Christ when He came. Therefore, the modern Christian concept of the marriage between "unevenly yoked" people takes on a special meaning within this theory. The aboriginal soul and the spiritually converted human being live side by side within a marriage, sometimes without either of them being aware of it.
With nations and countries, the natural system of the Lord's creation is the monarchy, where the king is answerable to the Lord. A democracy that is ruled by the aboriginal element of its society is, by definition, amoral. Thus any king or leader of a nation needs to be a true servant of the Lord in order for him or her to be approved of God.
There have been aboriginal kings or rulers who received the title, "a man of his people." This reference attests to their aboriginal nature. An aboriginal leader can be immensely popular, but the true test of his character is whether or not he or she believes in the Lord? That's the only saving grace for the aborigine regardless of their position in the world.
It's not that the aborigines are intellectually inferior. They are equally intelligent and talented as the non-aborigine. The only thing they lack is that spark from the Lord that will light their spirit. When it happens, the spirit comes alive in them suddenly and they understand everything. Jesus referred to their former state as blindness. "they have eyes that can see, but they do not see."
It's interesting that the US system of government is a democratic republic. It's not a democracy. The people elect their representatives, who then vote their conscience. The President is elected by the Electoral College, which represents the people's vote in national elections. The Supreme Court is appointed by the President, one judge at a time when there's a vacancy, and each justice of the Supreme Court is approved by the people's representatives again. Each branch of the US government performs according to the moral code that's imposed by the constitution "under God." Government changes, there are differences in Presidents. Some are closer to the Lord. Most have professed their faith in the Lord during the campaign, otherwise they'd never be elected.
When the aboriginal element in the population elects a bad President, the whole country suffers, and that's how it goes, but when there is a President who does the will of the Lord, like a king or a ruler who does the same, the whole country lives under the blessings of that leader.
There are spiritually endowed presidents, kings and rulers, who become corrupt after they assume leadership. Which brings up the interesting point that an aborigine cannot be possessed by evil, because he only has a soul and the soul cannot comprehend the spirit. Also, only the person who is born with a spirit can become possessed by evil. However, the natural state of the human being is to have a spirit and be the servant of the Lord. This is what Christianity is about, to preach the love of Jesus Christ, to give testimony regarding the faith in Christ, to worship the Creator of the universe and do His will.
Herod wanted to slay the child Jesus. He saw him as a threat to his throne. Herod was an evil king, he was possessed and, therefore, not an aborigine. All world leaders who are atheists are aborigines, but dictators like Hitler and Stalin were not aborigines, because they were possessed by the evil spirit. An aboriginal dictator lives and dies like an animal, but he cannot be possessed. The atrocities that he commits emanate from his animal nature. Once he's had his fill, he stops. An evil dictator never stops committing evil deeds. In the end he refuses to be taken alive. He would rather set fire to himself to prevent anybody from capturing him. Evil is an unquenchable fire.
F. The Worldview Perspective, or Weltanschauung.
The US has historically avoided becoming an empire, but in the absence of an opposing super power, the aboriginal element could be flirting with that idea. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Balance of Power theory has been set aside. Suddenly becoming the only super power in the world is a difficult situation to handle.
There are international expectations at play. Is the US responsible for maintaining peace in the Middle East? Some would say, yes. There are two opposing contentions here. One is that the US owes it to the Jewish people to safeguard their existence as a free state, the other is that the US has oil interests in the region. Both contentions are true to some extent, but the US could divest itself of the oil interests by not buying any oil from the Middle Eastern sources, and as for safeguarding Israel, the US could fully empower Israel to defend itself. However, neither of these options would preclude the US from becoming an empire. On the other hand, even the idea of becoming the world police is not appealing to some Americans. I don't think the police actions in Vietnam, Africa and Europe were a success from a worldview perspective. The US has always done best when perceived as a champion of freedom. By staying out of world conflicts until there's a clear underdog to save from being annihilated, the US has managed to play a heroic role during WW I, WW II, and Korea.
G. The Historical Perspective.
The Civil War in the US was a terrible time for the American people. Abraham Lincoln, a great aboriginal leader, went to war against the South to preserve the union. Over six hundred thousand Americans died killing each other for the sake of aboriginal ascendancy, to establish a pure aboriginal country, with a unified philosophy of life and a national perspective. Ostensibly, the issue was slavery, but the black people today know that it wasn't only that. There were greater economic issues. It had to do with the power struggle of the aborigines for who would control the agriculturally rich South. When two children fight over a piece of cake, the mother takes it away from both of them. Next time they won't fight over it, they'll divide it. However, in the case of the Civil War, that piece of cake is forever gone, because Cain killed Abel and there will be no next time. The shift to an aboriginal state of existence ever since has put the US culturally in a backward slide. The telling blow came in 1964, when prayer was outlawed in public schools by the Supreme Court.
One of the results of the concept of the separation of church and state has been a return to aboriginal principles. These were not the principles of the founding fathers. However, since the South, under the leadership of General Robert Lee, a non-aboriginal leader, lost the war, the US headed toward the concept of freedom for all religions and abandoned Christianity as the sole moral code for the American people. Essentially the age of secularism began in America. When a leader of a predominantly Christian country doesn't defend the faith of his people, then secularism comes to the fore. Secularism soon leads to atheists dominating the power structure and the educational system. In the last decade, for example, the California State Board of Education has succeeded in eliminating the name of Jesus from all public school text books.
I pray that the US will never become an empire and that there is a return to Christian values that made this country a haven for all oppressed people. Regardless of their religion, immigrants come to America to live in freedom, but that freedom was made possible because of the reliance of the founding fathers on the Lord. That's the history of the United States.
Site Index | Aramaic Bible