Bible Study, Part 10

Creation of Light (אוֹר)
By Gustave Doré

Genesis, Chapter 10 |
Sunday – August 30, 2026

Biblical accounts tend to be contested, contested among historians, biblical scholars, and outside forces attempting to "disprove", often by negation, the Bible. Thus far, we are only in the Old Testament, the Tanakh (תָּנָ״ךְ), and for obvious reasons this part of the Bible tends to be closed off, walled off really, to open discourse and debate, which is why the Book of Genesis tends to be speared from the painful convulsions of being brought down to the material level, the level of the masses, the human level, although this has been attempted and is still attempted, though less successfully than the myriad of cracks that have been eschewed by negation on the New Testament by false witnesses. Now, some will refer to this false witness hood, this anti-witness hood, as "critical" and "prudent" thinking. Well, I will refer to this as anti-thinking from now on, because these people are not thinkers; these people are attempting to drag the Bible first down to their human level, before finally smearing it and lowering it to the lowest infra-corporeal level, truly a crime.* The point was never to read the Bible, or any other scriptures; the point was to receive higher instruction and gain higher knowledge, something that most moderns have missed, including devout Jews and Christians, read "My Views on Fundamentalism". So again, you may enter into an argument with strict literalists in negativism, but since what you are attempting is an enterprise that can only be described in light terms as quite impossible, you may never win, and if you were to win, you would only do so blindly while facing a weak opponent, as if this was about opponents to begin with, but these people, the moderns, will make this into an issue of enmity, as they always do. I should also add, that the truth, while being hidden from plain view, nonetheless remains the truth, and this is perhaps above all the point of the Bible and most sacred scriptures, to account for the world beyond our own, and here I am not referring to some kind of lesser world within the purview and scope of our corporeal and immediate perceptions, read "Dreaming". Remember that these people tend to invariably act, for they do not prefer to contemplate, which makes it hard for them to truly reason.

    Now, as usual I will force myself to make certain things clear about this "Bible Study series". For instance, this will be part 10 in this series, and since this series is rather strict in how it has and in how it is being conceived, it would do you good to read each preceding part of this series. I will list each part in chronological order: part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, part 6, part 7, part 8, and part 9. Now, since we are getting up into a certain number of parts in this series, I will stop linking to each previous series following this part, mostly because it becomes too cumbersome. I should also add that this series, as has been mentioned in the past, constitutes a chain, and each part makes up one link in the chain, and without each link the chain becomes weakened, but beyond that analogy, it would also be fair to compare this series with almost any organism, not that I prefer to indulge in mechanism. Now, if you choose not to engage with this series in a chronological order, then you will have to take responsibility for any misunderstandings that may befall you, as these parts are coherent mostly when read in chronological order.

    I will, as usual, continue to refer to God, the Lord, and the Creator as Yahweh (יהוה) whenever I work with quotations directly from the Bible, as the Old Testament represents a covenant between Yahweh and the Hebrews (the Jews). Again, the debate about the universality of God (Yahweh) is not to be held here as it is simply outside the scope of this post.† It is important to be prudent in these regards and to not rush through scriptures or the theology of the scriptures. The fact is that a Christian is very different from a Jew, but the multiculturalism of today has almost erased these distinctions in the name of uniformity, and this is best exemplified in the concept of "Judeo-Christian". While there may be some truths to the concept of "Judeo-Christian", this concept is mostly a political creation rather than a doctrinal or theological creation, and even in history the defence for this term is sparse, or rather the evidence for the application of this term in history is sparse. Besides, at its core Christianity—particularly Catholicism, and more particularly modern Catholicism—is a proselytizing religion, while Judaism is not and has never been, unless we consider the God of the Old Testament proselytizing, which he is not when we consider scripture. The idea that the Old Testament must be unified with the New Testament is misguided, and the people who are adamant about this very much run the risk of again, bringing scripture down to the corporeal level. The point of scripture is that it is not to be understood by mere mortals; scripture represents knowledge beyond the human and ordinary level, and science in its many mutations may not reach this level without reverting back to its own traditions, read "Sacred Medicine". Again, this is a debate that could be carried on well into the night; really, well into the next day...

    I should again, make it clear that I rely on one specific publication of the Bible, namely the Catholic New Revised Standard (NRSV-CE); I rely on this publication of the Bible not because it is the most accurate or because it is closer to the unity of the source, but because it relies on plain English, because it is not copyrighted, and because it provides me with one publication to fall back on. This does not mean, however, that I also do not rely on parallel publications of the Bible while studying the Bible myself, but it does mean that if you are not relying on this publication of the Bible, that you are responsible for following along with each chapter, each verse, and each syllable made up by each character of the word of the Bible, the word of God, and there are indeed subtle differences between different publications of the Bible, and you must be aware of these difference and how they may impact your perception of scripture, and this is the paramount reason why one would be prudent in relying on one publication of the Bible, a kind of scriptural reference point. I should add that I personally dislike the concept of different publications and different "versions" of the Bible, as each of these represents an intolerable individualism that risks carrying all sorts of mutations based on the preference of the day forward that invariably serves the satanic end of diminishing the word of God, read "Notes on Reading".

    Because I adhere to the aforementioned doctrine, I will sometimes find it necessary to make certain changes to relevant quotations, and for the most part this will include substituting the words/titles "God" and "The Lord" with Yahweh, something that I will indicate by the usage of two brackets, [Yahweh]. It may also be that I find it unreasonable to put entire chapters of the Bible into my quotations, and this will be indicated by the usage of three dots inside two brackets, [...], indicating that preceding or succeeding texts that have not been included in my quotation. I will mostly do this to save space and time.

    Yet again, before we can proceed with the study at hand: if you have complaints about anything that I have written and asserted, then you are free to post them in the comment section below this post. I have received a few complaints so far on the official email attached to this page (etherealinsight@protonmail.com), but my policy is to only handle complaints in the comment section, as I have largely reserved other channels of communication for discussions of a more private nature, such as readers sending forward letters containing privileged information, etc. What this means is that I am unlikely to respond to an email complaint as I simply do not have time to handle them, nor do I have time to connect each complaint to each relevant post; simply using the comment section is the best and most straightforward option. This is not a hard rule, but it is a recommendation if you actually want me to respond; I also call on you to refrain from using offensive words in your comments. I should also mention again, that it is my intention of creating a separate page that will take care of all of the possible confusions and other important information to be considered in this study; that page is still not finished, and when it is finished I will simply link each post to that page in order that can skip having to reiterate all of this information in each of these posts, as I mentioned above.

✠ Nations Descended from Noah ✠
Genesis 10:1 – 5:

These are the descendants of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth; children were born to them after the flood.

The descendants of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. The descendants of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. The descendants of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim. From these the coastland peoples spread. These are the descendants of Japheth in their lands, with their own language, by their families, in their nations.

Dawning of the first nations are happening and the Bible makes it clear that it would be perfectly sensible and good to rely on the motif of "The Primordial Body", if we in this instance consider the primordial body to consist of the collection of people's that made up the first generation in the post flood world, Noah (נֹחַ) and his family.‡ This means the quite obvious thing, that all humans alive today are descendants from these first generations, although this must be understood within the closed system of divine law, read "Hyperborea". From a different yet still metaphysical perspective, it would also be interesting to look at these first generations of Noah as the children of Yahweh in the new Dawn, on the new Monday, for they have all been condemned and blessed with the new world, the world beyond the evils and the shadows of the old world, and the world approaching with naïvitey the light of the next day; indeed, it would be quite prudent to talk about a kind of childhood of humanity, even though some would point to the story of Cain and Abel as the childhood of humanity, and I suppose this would be true, and I should add that while we may contemplate a certain separation between the old world and the new world, this will eventually run into certain problems, read "The Problem of Borders". Note as well, and this will be considered in greater detail later, that written and enshrined in the Bible is the leitmotif of deceit and the case against Utopia, but I intend to return to this in a different part of the Bible.

    Note the slightly confusing or unusual listing of names in these passages. This is something quite typical of the Old Testament, and it may at times be confusing to keep all of these genealogies apart, but these are all the immediate (within 1 generation) descendants of Japheth (יֶפֶת). The Coastline people spread outward from the one node in the genealogy Japheth, and so forth. This kind of listing of descendents will go on in chapter 10 of Genesis, and may not be necessary for the purpose of this post for me to list them all here, but I will return to this later.

    In the point of nations, I must add that "nations" in this Biblical context refers to something quite different, different from what most moderns conceive of as "nations". In the Biblical and Judaic sense "nations" refers chiefly to something hereditary and tribal, not to the modern concept of "nation-states", read "The Problem with Nationalism".

Genesis 10:6 – 14:

The descendants of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan. The descendants of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. The descendants of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. Cush became the father of Nimrod; he was the first on earth to become a mighty warrior. He was a mighty hunter before [Yahweh]; therefore it is said, 'Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the [Yahweh].' The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, and Accad, all of them in the land of Shinar. From that land he went into Assyria, and built Nineveh, Rehoboth-ir, Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. Egypt became the father of Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, Pathrusim, Casluhim, and Caphtorim, from which the Philistines come.

It has now become clear that while Yahweh may be the God of the Old Testament, he is indeed, in full accordance with Biblical doctrine, the father of all nations through Noah, that is to say, the father of all nations in the post flood world. Again, read the second footnote, this is quite different from being a universally revealed God; this is also in full accordance with Judaic doctrine.§

    Nimrod (נִמְרוֹד) is perhaps the most significant person mentioned in this passage, as he is described as the first warrior, the first man to truly earn the warrior rank among the people of God. Here the prudent and the socially sensitive among us may notice the tendency towards a certain kind of stratification, read "Hierarchy", of people, and indeed this is not unlike the Hindu caste system, but I digress. These hierarchies and "cast systems", if you will, developed naturally in all traditional societies.

    I should also add that the Bible, like most ancient texts, makes it clear that certain people are more suited for certain lifestyles, such as vagabonds living on the road and following the trade winds and settled populations depending on time, etc, read "The Census".

Genesis 10:15 – 20:

Canaan became the father of Sidon his firstborn, and Heth, and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. Afterward the families of the Canaanites spread abroad. And the territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon, in the direction of Gerar, as far as Gaza, and in the direction of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. These are the descendants of Ham, by their families, their languages, their lands, and their nations.

Again here the story and the history of the first nations is expanded upon and this is mostly a testimony of that, which is underscored by the attention to details. Take these passages as a piece of history, a history you may take to heart. Of course, many of these tribes (nations) will matter later in the Bible, but for now it is appropriate to put them aside.

Genesis 10:21 – 32:

To Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the elder brother of Japheth, children were born. The descendants of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, and Aram. The descendants of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash. Arpachshad became the father of Shelah; and Shelah became the father of Eber. To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan. Joktan became the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, Sheba, Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab; all these were the descendants of Joktan. The territory in which they lived extended from Mesha in the direction of Sephar, the hill country of the east. These are the descendants of Shem, by their families, their languages, their lands, and their nations.

These are the families of Noah’s sons, according to their genealogies, in their nations; and from these the nations spread abroad on the earth after the flood.

According to profane science, it would indeed be true to say that all humans and indeed all animals originate from one common ancestor, and this passage from the Bibles serves to confirm this. There was never a question about the origin of man that could not be answered by divine scripture and divine law.‖ Of course, in keeping with Genesis 1, man had to repopulate the earth with humans and with animalkind; this again assumes that man holds dominion over all animals, which is true and which is good, read "What is Animal Welfare?". Now, some people do take these passages from the Bible and superimpose their own worldview on them, and one example of this could be the people who claim that this is Yahweh's reason for creating the many races of man, but this is only one part of the puzzle: sure, it is true that the puzzle includes humans with differentiated aptitudes, read "Qualification", and while race may be a significant category, the errors lies in assuming that everyone within a race is equal to the best individuals of that race, and it may even be true to say that the lowest elements of each race have more in common with each other than with any strata above themselves; the masses tends to gravitate towards masses, read "Democracy". Would we expect a stupid person of oriental origin to act much different from a stupid person of occidental origin? The fact is that stupidity consumes everything in its wake, and this is why qualification is a much more useful category for segregation and social stratification, as has been shown not only in the Bible but by the histories of all great metaphysical traditions. This is not to say that their multiculturalism is a good solution, it is not, but it is to say that the nationalist utopia of ethnic segregation is a stupid idea. What any good and stable society would benefit from is a much more cooperative and hierarchical structure, read "Feudalism, Good or Bad?", where people truly belong and know themselves by their own shoes, not by the whims of the liberal establishment, by the dictates of the humanist axiom.

    You have reached the end of this part of the Bible, or rather my examination of the Bible. For more on this series, follow the label "Bible Study series". If you are interested in me, read my "About me" page and my "Who Am I" post.

Reginald Drax (AKA, M. C. Dutt) – August 30, 2026.

Footnote(s)

* I should add that I am not referring to the concept of a "thought crime" here; instead I am referring to the crime of negation, the intellectual crime that is. I will admit that the difference between a "thought crime" and a "intellectual crime" may seem slight, but the difference is really only that a thought crime renders the thought itself a crime.

† Again, for more on this subject I direct you to my previous posts: "Yahweh Elohim" and "Proof of the Name of Yahweh". What I should add here is that the universality of the revealed Creator is much less important than the unity of the source.

‡ It would be just as well to consider the first generations of the Animal Kingdom in this connection, and here the bridge could be gaped by naturalism; read more in my post "Naturalism and Its Confused Opponents".

§ The best way to conceive of this, in accordance with most Judaic doctrine, would indeed be to view the Hebrews, the Jews as they would become, as the "chosen people", the populus Dei.

‖ This is what some philosophers would refer to as "monism", but it is more complicated that this actually; for more on this, I direct you to my posts, "The Great North" and "The Archean Eon".