Introduction
There is recourse today for many to trace history to their root or ancestral home in order to know their background. There are many scholars who have devoted themselves to this course, that of tracing Black/African presence in the Bible. Adamo (2009) argues in favour of the African presence in the Table of Nations which he traced to the root, using name as a means of proper identification, “What is a name?”
Towards the Discovery of the Self
McCray undertook a rather rigorous yet a thorough and fruitful journey of exploration into Genesis 10. He explicates on the genealogies of Noah with his children: Japheth, Ham and Shem. The relevance of these lengthy listing of names rest on the fact that a name is more than a handle used for identification purpose. Among Africans, it is being used as a symbol and sign, mark of identification of the people and what they may have experienced. Thus, it can express the identity of the bearer in relation to his/her people or God as noted by Mbiti (1991).
Genesis 10 gives an understanding about the people mentioned as well as their inert-relationships of the ancient people hence; it is expedient to explore the text. Here we find the origin and classification of the nations in the ancient world that provides basic information about the nations and groups of people which are recorded in unique passages of the scripture and ancient historical document, the most voluminous of the ancient world. It characterised the Noahic family tree.
The Essay on Aids Epidemic African Nations
Scientific Process of Identification Observation: Why do the nations of Eastern and Southern Africa have the world's highest rates for sexually transmitted diseases amongst the population? How does the local government play a role (if any), in the preventative measures that are taken by its citizens? What is the correlation between social and economic conditions and STD's in these nations? ...
Consequently, all nations today can adequately be traced back to a person or people identified in Genesis 10. Felder (1991) perceived the whole idea of Genesis 10 as sacralization. A term he used to decry the preference for the sons of Shem as the tribe. He argues that the genealogies in Genesis 10 should be examined in conjunction with the account in 1 Chronicles 1:1-2: 55. He decried the quick admittance by readers of the purported comprehensive listing catalogue that consist of a series of sacralization in order to accord a nation more importance than the other. Noth (1981) shows that Genesis 10 represents a conflation of two groups – The Jahwist (J) and Priestly (P) traditions that are separated by centuries which also account for the discrepancies in identifying the land of Cush; the relationship between Cush and Sheba, the difference between Seba and Sheba. Genesis 10 mentions Seba as the son of Cush whereas Sheba is the grandson of Cush according to Genesis 10:8.
Hence the text is identifying the descendants of Ham. Again, in Genesis 10:28, the text introduces an anomaly as it points Sheba as a direct descendant of Shem and not of Ham. Otto (1965) attributed the sacralization to the similarity between the two Hebrew letters – samech (s) of Sheba and its equivalent shin (s) that are interchangeable in Old South Arabic. Hence, one could argue that Genesis 10 presents two persons named as Sheba as a descendant of Shem. Felder (1991) on his treatment of the Old Testament genealogies, notes that a critical study, illuminates theological motives that inevitably yielded an increasing tendencies to arrange difference in priorities, thereby attaching the greatest significance to the Israelites as an ethnic and national entity, greater than all other people of the earth.
Such instance is recorded about Miriam and Aaron’s narratives which show the sacralization of their intention of predilection for the nation of Israel (Felder, 1989).
While at first glance Genesis 10 has the appearance of being a single listing of ancient nations, biblical criticism has for sometime demonstrated that Genesis 10 represents a conflation of at least two different lists, that is the Jahwist (J) and the Priestly (P), separated by centuries. In fact, the conflation of different traditions in Genesis 10 doubtlessly accounts for matters such as: the discrepancies in identifying the land of Cush as earlier noted (Adamo, 2001).
The Term Paper on Death of a Nation
Clifford Dowdey’s Death of a Nation: The Story of Lee and His Men at Gettysburg is a military history examining the Confederate loss at this epic battle, particularly the decision-making process and the Southern commanders’ failure to perform up to their potential. Partly a fawning defense of Robert E. Lee and partly an insightful study of why the South even dared invade the North, it demonstrates ...
In any case, the Table of Nations as it stands does not delineate sharp racial differences between the ancient peoples of Africa, South Arabia and Mesopotamia. The true motive lies elsewhere.
In this long progression, then theological presuppositions of a particular ethnic group displace any concern for historiography and ethnography. The descendants of Noah apart from those of Shem are increasingly insignificant and gain access to the text only as they serve as foils to demonstrate the priority of Israelites. The subtle process being described may consequently be called sacralization because it represent an attempt on the part of succeeding generations of one ethnic group to construe salvation history in terms distinctly favourable to it as oppose other.
Here, ethnic particularity evolves with a certain divine vindication and inevitably the dangers of rank racism lie just beneath the surface. Gene Rice has noted rightly that the genealogies do not express negative attitudes about African descent, but it is important to clarify an aspect of Rice’s judgment in light of the way in which sacralization expresses itself in these genealogies. He undermined the predilection for the nation of Israel as against every other tribe Thus, these genealogies are construed theologically to enhance the status of a particular people; and this is precisely the process that I am describing as sacralization.
Critical Evaluation
The author tried in his presentation on the Table of Nations. He made every effort to establish the biblical accounts. However, he did only establish the ancient records without any necessary argument as did other scholar in African Cultural Hermeneutics and African Studies. The author did not take pain to consider the unique roles of Africans to the development of the Nation of Israel as against the background of defacing other nations around. The mention of Israel as the choice tribe of God actually denotes the sacralization according to Felder (1989).
Hence, African scholars are of the view that the table of Nations does not reflect the true account of the Creator, whose recognition of all tribes and nations was demonstrated through the death of Jesus Christ for all without racism.
The Essay on African Art 2
African Art does not have specific date to which it evolved because most early African Art was carved in wood, which perished quickly. This is why most art dates from the 19th and early 20th century. Many 20th century artists admired and collected pieces of African Art. They enjoyed the bold color, expression, and form that produced a new beginning in art history. African Art was mostly dedicated ...
Conclusion
The Table of Nation is an ancient account and as such, every nation that traces their origin back to this record are in order however, a complete exegesis should be done in order to pass across the right message to the younger generation of scholars and researchers.
References
Adamo, D.T. (2001).
Reading and Interpreting the Bible in African Indigenous Churches, Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, pp.10-12.
Felder, H.C.(1989).
Troubling Biblical Waters, Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, pp. 38-42.
Felder, H.C.(1991).
Stony the Road We Trod, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, pp.133-134.
Noth, M. (1981).
A Historical Penteuchal Tradition, Translated Bernhard, W.A. Chico. California: Scholars Press, pp. 21-24.
Otto, E. (1965).
The Old Testament: An Introduction, New York: Harper and Row, p.184
