Maybe the Canaanites were never indigenous to Eretz Israel?

There is an interesting tension among us defenders of Israel, between the Leftist desire to stress the indigeneity of Jews to Israel, and the more Conservative Religious Zionists who are not so afraid to brag about how Biblically the Israelites conquered people there before them. 

I have mostly chosen to stress when this issue comes up that whatever your moral opinion of what happened in Biblical Times, the only way anyone in the Common Era can claim descent from the Canaanites who lived in the land of Israel (the Canaanites of other Levantine countries are a different matter) is through the Canaanites who was absorbed into the Population of Israel, by the time of Solomon all those Judges 1 hold outs in the Valleys were defeated. That includes any Canaanite DNA that arguably exists among the Palestinians, some of them may descend from Jews and Samaritans who converted to Christianity and/or later Islam, but for them the only claim would be Blood Quantum.  And the Philistines had no descendants left even before Alexander came. 

However I recently watched a video from the YouTube channel titled Dig about Canaan and the Canaanites. They aren’t someone who believes in the inerrancy of Scripture but the facts I learned from it are still interesting. Including that when going to Early and Early-Middle Bronze Age texts, the references that would predate even the time of Abraham, Canaan as a Geographical term referred originally to mainly the area around Baalbek, Sidon was defined as to its South.

Genesis 10:19 is at face value, based on how we’re used to interpreting certain names seemingly saying the opposite, that Sidon was the northern limit of Canaan. But I think a more careful reading can imply something consistent with what the Dig video revealed. 

Genesis 10 is written from the standpoint of where Noah’s Family first settled after The Flood, where your approach to the regions of Lebanon and Israel would be coming from the north. So in that context “Sidon as you go to Gerar” is a southern border. 

Genesis 10:19 is the only time the name Gaza appears in Genesis, in fact the only time it appears in the Pentateuch, so in that context it being a different Gaza is not beyond the realm of possibility. Ghazzeh is a location in Lebanon along the Litani River in the Western Beqqa District, it shows up on the Wikipedia Disambiguation page for Gazza so clearly it’s considered a cognate name.  And a Gazza that you’d stop at “as you go to” Sodom and Gomorrah from the north makes way more sense as this Gaza then the one in the Gaza Strip. 

And I already talked about how Lasha is likely the same place as Leshem/Laish which would eventually be renamed Dan.  A Northern limit of Israel that’s also a Southern Limit of Canaan. 

These Canaanites were already settling in Eretz Israel by the time of Abraham. The Amorites in particular doing so as conquerors like they also conquered much of Iraq from the start of the Isin-Larsa period.  But people were there before them.

The City of Jericho is archaeologically considered to be arguably the oldest city on Earth. The destruction of its Middle Bronze IIC layer around 1580-1540 BCE is the only one that matches the description in the Book of Joshua due to details like the extensive burning. But this was neither the first or last time the city would be in some way destroyed and rebuilt. 

Et-Tell, which I talked about in my Ai post, was an Early Bronze Age city from before 3000 BCE to its destruction around 2400 BCE. There’s also Lachish, as well as Megiddo and Arad which like Jericho may even have been Cities of a sort already even before the Bronze Age. 

2400-2300 BCE seems to be a period of decline for Earl Bronze Israel, many cities were destroyed then and possibly already having their original populations replaced, partially or fully.  This could be when the Canaanites first invaded. 

So what was the Biblical Genealogy of the Pre-Canaanites of Israel?

The Southern most parts, especially where the Philistines would later live, were Egyptian Outposts during the Very Early Bronze Age. 

If you’re willing to entertain a not entirely Global Flood view then perhaps some of them, those Pre-Bronze settlements were surviving non Noahites? The local Samaritans have a tradition that Salim Nablus (which I identify with Salem of Genesis 14 and Shalem of Genesis 33 and Salim of John 3) was founded by Yered son of Mahalaleel before The Flood.  Yered had many sons and daughters, it could be while Enoch “walked with God” that his branch of the Yeredite line moved somewhere else to where the hypothetical Local Flood happened (probably the Persian Gulf region). 

However, is it possible Abraham’s Family was not actually indigenous to where their story begins in the latter part of Genesis 11? 

I agree with the view that Ur Kasdim was Urkesh, Urkesh and Harran were both cities in modern Turkey, east of the Euphrates and North-West of Assyria. Because this era is sometimes called either Padan-Aram or Aram-Nahrain some verses call Abraham an Aramean based on where he grew up, but his genealogy goes back to a brother of Aram named Arphaxad. 

Arphaxad himself does not seem to have given his name to any ancient people or region, and I consider all of Bill Cooper’s proposals for Arphaxad in After The Flood dubious. 

I remain doubtful that the Post-Flood Cainan/Kainan/Kenen was ever original to the Genesis 10 or 11 genealogies, but I do believe he’s an authentic inclusion in Luke 3 meaning someone by that name associated with the Aprhaxadite genealogy in some way did exist at the right time. It’s possible he’s the Patronym of the Kenite Tribe which produced Jethro the Father in Law of Moses a Priest in Midian (but not Midianite himself). My theory that Salah married a daughter of Cainan would then suggest there is a pattern of Kenites marrying their daughters into the line of Salah. And as the father of a Pre-Aaronite Priesthood maybe he’s also Melchizedek?

Salah may have lived in the Wadi Sallah area in the Tubas Governorate. Salah and Shelah are distinct names in Hebrew, and Shelah of Judah wouldn’t be the namesake of a place in northern Samaria. Bill Cooper couldn't consider this because he was distracted looking for the Arphaxad line only in Mesopotamia. Tel El-Farah by Wadi Sallah commonly identified with Tirzah was an Early Bronze I and II city that was then uninhabited from about 2750 BCE to 1820 BCE. 

Genesis 40:15 calls where Joseph was before he was sold into slavery (Shechem if you want to be very specific) the Land of the Hebrews. Which can justify saying this is the original land of settlement for Eber/Heber. Neither Hamor or his son Shechem are never called Canaanites so maybe they descend patrilineally from an unnamed son of Eber. Genesis 11:17 says Eber lived after he begat Peleg and had more sons and daughters, more than one son even when excluding Peleg. 

Joktan’s sons are associated with places in Arabia, especially Yemen, but Havilah shows they may have extended pretty far north. The way that’s described suggests they may have left where they originally were. Meaning maybe Peleg stayed where Salah and Eber lived. Or maybe Peleg left the Salah area too, but Bill Cooper’s claim of a Phalgu where the Chebar and Eurphates meet I can’t independently verify, same with his claims for Reu/Ragau.

Maybe the Egyptian name for this region, Retjenu, could be related to Reu/Ragau?

Serug did live in Aram-Naharin however giving his name to the area now known as Suruc but more anciently as Serugh or Sarug. 

It could be that some of the Pelegites left Israel for Padan-Aram during or after the conquests that destroyed Et-Tell and Early Bronze incarnations of Jericho and many other cities. 

Remember that Abraham was not alone when he came to Israel from Haran, nor was it just his family and a few servants, he was able to raise an army of 318 men from his household at a time before he even had Ishmael yet. 

Salem isn’t Jerusalem

The popularly declared Melchizedek Temple in Jerusalem isn’t actually old enough to go back to the time of Abraham, there was a good un-biased analysis of it by the Armstrong Institute of all people. They mistakenly identify it with the "City of David" location of The Ark but that was a Tent. 

I had argued what I'm about to about Salem on a different blog in the past, but because I fell for the Melchizedek Temple hype I abandoned it, but now that I know that doesn’t hold up, I’m revisiting the issue again with some new information.

Genesis 14 is not the only time Salem is mentioned in Genesis, people just miss the other one because of a difference in transliteration. In the Hebrew text Shalem in Genesis 33:18 is the exact same name. 

The Genesis 33 Shalem is a City of Shechem, in fact Shechem is never a City name in Genesis but this general area, in fact using Shechem as a geographical term at all seems to be one of those anachronisms, it was named after the son of Hamor. So no Shechem wouldn't be mentioned by name in the Ebla Tablets. Since I place the time of Jacob and Joseph as Middle Bronze IIA at the latest the entire Genesis narrative predates Shechem ever becoming a major fortified city. 

Before the city named Shalem is where Jacob pitched his tent on land he bought from Hamor, the same land in which Joseph would be buried centuries later. Genesis 33:19 and Joshua 24:32.

The non Canonical book of Judith 4:4 also places Salem in the allotment of Ephraim.

Salem’s other appearance in the Hebrew Bible is Psalm 76:2. I already argued that Zion here isn’t Jerusalem but Bethlehem. The gist of my reading of the verse is the same, God’s Tabernacle and Dwelling Place “YHWH is there” being different locations is actually consistent with Ezekiel 40-48’s geography where YHWH-Shammah is in the southern third of the Holy Portion but the Tabernacle (misleadingly called a Temple in Translations) is in the exact center. 

I think the Salem/Shalem of Genesis is also Salim in John 3:23. Aenon is a Hellenized form of the Hebrew/Aramaic word for Spring, so this could be any Spring in the Nablus Governorate. There is a village today called Salim in the Nablus Governorate east of Nablus and west of Joseph’s Tomb that has ruins going back to the Early Bronze Age. Ain al-Kabira is a Spring near it. 

Both David Rohl and Immanuel Velikvosky’s Revised Chronologies involve identifying the Shalem Ramses II Miamun captures in his 8th Year Campaign as recorded at the Ramesseum with Jerusalem, for Rohl that’s making him Shishak and for Velikovsky it’s to make him Necho. But the Egyptians were calling this city Jerusalem, form Middle Kingdom Execration Texts to the Amarna Letters. 

The Mount Ebal site isn't Joshua's Altar

The biggest issue is that it’s on the North Side of the Mountain while Gerizim is to the South, and Ebal is the taller of the two mountains. Since the blessing ritual foretold in Deuteronomy 11 and 27 and fulfilled in Joshua 8 requires people to stand on both mountains facing each other, Joshua’s Altar must have been on the south side.

But also when I read Deuteronomy and Joshua I don’t picture a full structure like this site, I picture just the Stones with the Law written on them, Stones that were probably removed at some point and so are unlikely to be found by archeologists. 

The site is supported by the same Biblical Archaeology YouTube Channels that promote the 1446 BC Amenhotep II Exodus simply because they want to cling to every seemingly Bible Verifying Archaeology site that isn’t seen as complete wackery like Ron Wyatt’s claims. So they ignore or explain away the fact that it is archaeologically an early Iron Age site. 

Late Exodus proponents like David Falk promote it because broadly an early Iron Age date for Joshua suits them. But since the use of this site starts in 1220 BC it’s actually too early for Falk’s model which has the conquest start in 1215 BC 40 years after the death of Ramses II’s first son, which is the earliest plausible Ramses II Exodus date. 

The fact that the animals offered here were all Levitically Clean is evidence this was an Israelite not Canaanite site, I won’t dispute that. But this wouldn’t be the only Israelite cultic site we’ve found not otherwise mentioned in Scripture, there’s also the Tel-Motza Temple and the Tel-Arad Temple. 

Arad is easy enough to expect such a thing from due to its association with the Kenites, the Pre-Aaronic Priesthood of the Father In-Law of Moses in Judges 1:16. 

But Motza is a very obscure place mentioned in The Bible only once.  I had at one point tried theorizing it was Nob using Isaiah 10 as evidence it must be very close to Jerusalem, but Isaiah 10 also seems to be intending locations north of Jerusalem, the direction from which  Assyria’s Army was approaching. 

Back to the subject of this northern Ebal Altar. I at first considered Jeroboam (the theory that his calves at Bethel and Dan were like the Cherubim of a Nationwide Holy Place and so his Capital of Shechem was where Sacrifices were made), but he’s too late for 1220-1000 BC even in Ussher’s timeframe for Solomon. 

There is a certain type of Fundamentalist who thinks Josiah’s ban on making sacrifices anywhere other than The Temple must have applied all the way back to Moses because it seems at face value similar to the commands in Leviticus 17:3-4 and Deuteronomy 12:13-14 and 18.. That of course would be a problem for even Joshua’s Altar still being used after The Tabernacle was set up at Shiloh. 

In the case of Deuteronomy this ignores the context of verse 12 being about the Levites in many Gates and verse 15 saying you can eat flesh in any Gates which would seem to contradict Leviticus 17 saying you only eat Animals offered in Levitical Sacrifices. The word for “One” in Deuteronomy 12:14 is Echad, the same word that says The Lord is One which Trinitarians should take note of.  Deuteronomy 12:21 clarified that these offerings can be made at other places that are far from the main place. Joshua 22:10-34 shows that the Trans-Jordan Tribes had at least one Altar of their own. 

The natural reconciliation of these issues is that sacrifices have to be made at proper Levitical Location.  Which means any of the Levitical Cities from Joshua 21 could house legitimate places for Sacrifices. Not all of them had whole structures like these built, but it seems some did and maybe more will be found some say.

Shechem (which both mountains are considered part of) is one of those cities, it could be the Shechemite places for offering was originally where Joshua’s Altar was, but some events that happened during the transition from the Late Bronze to Early Iron Age caused it to change. 1220 BC is in my preferred timescale for the very late Judges period.

Or since Shechem was also the border between Ephraim and Manasseh they may have had places for making Sacrifices both on the South of Gerizim for Ephraim and the North of Ebal for Manasseh. That could be part of why Western Manasseh has Levitical cities in Joshua 21 then other tribes, they were also sharing Shechem with Ephraim. I assume Gerizim is less excavated than Ebal because of its sacredness to the Samaritan Community, even if no remains exist there could be any number of reasons Ebal’s Early Iron Age altar survived but Gerizim’s did not. Or maybe Ebal always had the larger full structure because it was for sharing with Manasseh. 

City names that appear only in Joshua 21 are likely known by other names elsewhere including early in Joshua, that’s what I’ve already argued in prior posts about Ai/Hai and Kibzaim. Since Motza/Moza appears only in Joshua 18 and Almon only in Joshua 21 the possibility that they’re the same can’t be ruled out. It’s also possible that Nob is another name for Gibeon or the part of GIbeon where the Levites lived.

The only proposed locations for Ramoth-Gilead I consider plausible are those south of the Zargo/Jabbok River, it’s in the territory of Gad not Manasseh and is the middle of the Trans-Jordan Cities of Refuge leading me to conclude it should be close to the same latitude as Shechem. It may also be the site of the Joshua 22 Altar and Penuel. 

But also sometimes the Israelites did just do things they weren't supposed to. 

On the mostly unrelated subject of the textual variations in the references to these Mountains in Deuteronomy. The DSS fragments of Deuteronomy and the LXX agree that the Altar was on Ebal. 

To the people who argue that even independent of everything else the Samaritans are clearly inserting about Gerizim it feel wrong for the Law to be placed on the Mountain of The Church rather then Blessing. Christians should realize that this perfectly predicts Paulian theology in Galatians 3:10-13. 

It is precisely the fact that the Law being on Gerizim in the SP fixes an apparent problem that proves it's not the original, people don't altar texts to create problems. Same with Terah's lifespan being shortened in Genesis 11. 

Stephen was probably not a Samaritan

There is a claim out there that a lot of the odd things Stephen says in Acts 7 can be explained by him perhaps being a Samaritan or influenced by their traditions. While I found this idea interesting at first, I quickly came to realize that the specific pillars of the claim are faulty.

Stephen is Pro-David while the Samaritan Tradition is Anti-David. The way Stephen uses Psalm 132 even implies the location of David's Tabernacle not Solomon’s Temple is the true intended location of the Mishkan, not very compatible with the Samaritan Gerizim tradition. Stephen also quotes Prophets the Samaritan don’t recognize like Isaiah and Amos. 

The Samaritan Pentateuch reflects the Samaritan Custom of saying Shehmaa (The Name) instead of Adonai (The Lord) as stand in for the Tetragrammaton. Stephen in Acts 7 is definitely following the Jewish custom here, in verses 30-37, 49 and 59-60. Saying The Name did also become a custom in Rabbinic Judaism, but it seems to have developed later, I’m aware of no example of it in the First Century CE or BCE. The New Testament certainly never does it, the word name is only ever a descriptor never used as a Name or Title for God. 

Some of the things alleged to be explained by textual differences between the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Masoretic Text, like saying 75 rather than 70 people went to Egypt, are just as easily explained by following the Septuagint which is what you’d expect from him being a leader in a Greek Speaking Jewish Community, but more than that so were his accusers which included Jews of Alexandria and Cyrene the specific communities most likely to be attached to the LXX. Stephen’s quote of Amos is another case of him using the LXX. 

As an enemy of LXX primacy and the popular claim that the NT consistently uses it I consider Stephen in Acts 7 the one case where the Septuagint likely is the source material being used.  I believe the overall message of Stpehen’s sermon is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but since he’s not an Apostle I wouldn't treat as infallible specific details unique to him or his choice of text. 

Saying Terah died right before Abraham leaves Harran at 75 is not a conclusion you need the Samaritan Pentateuch to come to.  In fact if you aren’t stopping to do the math then it is in all versions the natural conclusion since Genesis describes Terah dying and then Abraham being called out of Harran. Now sometimes Genesis does describe things like this out of order, especially when changing which generation is now the Main Character, so this alone isn’t proof Stephen was right on this matter but it does show you can jump to this assumption no matter which text you’re using. 

The apparent contradiction caused by the math that only the SP lacks is easily resolved by remembering that Genesis 5:32 and 6:10 and 7:13 and 9:18 and 10:1 all list Noah’s sons as Shem, Ham and Japheth while the rest of Genesis 10 clearly treated Japheth as the oldest and explicitly says he is in verse 21. Sometimes the sons are named not in birth order but in an order that lists the one the overall Biblical Genealogy goes through first. So Abraham being listed first in Genesis 11:26-27 repeats that pattern, Nachor seems to be Terah’s first born since he and his descendants inherited Terah’s land in Harran. 

It’s Acts 7:16 that really seems to a casual observer very Samaritan.  Except that the Samaritan Pentateuch doesn’t actually disagree with the Masoretic text on either issue Stephen is alleged to be contradicting the Masoretic Text on. In the SP the first three Patriarchs are buried at Mamre in Kirjath-Arba aka Hebron and Jacob not Abraham bought a field near Shechem from Hamor/Emmor the father of Shechem/Sychem. We also say in verses 8-9 that Stephen used the term Patriarch primarily of Jacob’s sons, not Jacob and his ancestors. And verse 15 explicitly distinguished the fathers who died in Egypt he’s talking about from Jacob.

Stephen is not directly saying that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were buried in Shechem, the intent to me is clearly to refer to people who died in Egypt and were at first laid to rest there until the Exodus. The actual Hebrew Bible Texts only directly refer to Joseph having his body moved and buried at Shechem on the land bought from Hamor in Joshua 24:32, but it's reasonable to infer others were with him. 

Saying Abrahm bought the field from Emmor is not quite as easy to explain. It could be it was land Abraham intended to buy but it wasn’t carried out till Jacob.  Like how Elisha fulfilled some missions first given to Elijah like anointing Jehu and Hazael. We do know that Abraham had spent time in the area of Shechem in Genesis 12:6 where he did build an Altar.

People just assumed off vibes that saying something unusual about Shechem sounds Samaritan.  I do see some people word this as about Samaritan Traditions not the SP text itself, but whether or not such a tradition exists, it’s not the only way to come to Stephen’s conclusion. The Samaritan tradition is that all of Jacob’s sons were buried at Shechem, not just Joseph, no contradiction on where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were buried. Stephen could be referring to that, or he could be referring to sons and grandsons of Joseph.  The only Shechem based Samaritan disagreement about events involving Abraham is wanting the location of Isaac’s offering in Genesis 22 to be Moreh rather than Moriah, that too involved no textual difference it seems just interpreting them to be the same name, and is irrelevant to anything in Acts 7.

Stephen also doesn't have to be a Samaritan to see himself as a descendent of specifically the Joseph Tribes, Ephriam and Manesseh. I do believe the Samaritans descend from Ephraim and Manesseh into the gentiles settled in the region by the Assyrians as I talked about in a prior post. But they aren’t the only descendents of Ephraim and Manesseh, those who in 2 Chronicles 30 took part in Hezekiah’s Passover I believe became citizens of Judah and thus Jews. 

Another appeal to Samaritan tradition is the idea that God first called Abraham when he was still in Ur Kassidim.  Nothing in the actual Text of Genesis contradicts such a thing, I'm sure you can find plenty of purely Jewish fan fiction depicting God already calling Abraham at Ur Kassidim.  In fact the KJV reading of Genesis 12:1 says " no YHWH had siad unto" implying now isn't the first time.

Dan and the cities they renamed

I hold the view that Leshem in Joshua 19 and Laish in Judges 18 are not the same. But more importantly then that I doubt Tel-Dan is either.

Tel-Dan I think is Dan-Jaan in 2 Samuel 24:6 which is a Trans-Jordan location. 

In the context of Joshua 19:47 I think Leshem is a location outside the allotment just described but not as far from it as others.  And to help explain the context of the reference to Dan in the Son of Deborah is probably a coastal port city. 

So I lean toward Tel-Gador which was inhabited going back to the Early Bronze Age so there were people there before the Danites. It seem to be the only real Bonze Age settlement the Coat of Israel north of Joppa/Jaffa but south of Dor. Yet it's currently not believed to be mentioned in The Bible.

Laish introduced in Judges 18:7 and mentioned again in 14 and 27-29 is associated with a Beth-Rehob the only other reference to which is 2 Samuel 2:6 where it seems like close to Zobah/Homs leading me to conclude it's in the Dan used as an idiom for Israel's Northern border.  

A Rehob is also linked to the "entering in of Hamath" in Numbers 13:21 believed by scholars to be Labweh the source of the Orontes River in northern Lebanon north of Baalbek in the Baalbek District. But there is room for interpretation on that. 

A Rehob is also part of the allotment of Asher, possibly in it's north. 

I also think Laish was probably not a Coast city because given Sidon's sea faring nature it's hard to imagine Sidonians in a coastal city being this cut off.

If we take the entering in of Hamath being Labweh view, then Laish as Duris, Jdeide, Deir El Ahmar or Ras-Baalbek could all be plausible. Unless we interpret Beth-Rehob as part of Mount Lebanon and the Labweh is in the valley to it's East but Laish in a valley to it's West, in which case I'd look in the Kadisha Valley in the Bisharri District of the North Governorate. 

But in a the other model I'm looking in the Hula Valley, but west of the Joran, not in the Golan Heights, either within the pre 67 border of Israel or in the Marjayoun District of Lebanon.

Even in the context of a modern southern identification for Laish, I still The Bible hints at the Danites in time migrated further north. DNA evidence shows the Christian Population of Lebaon (Majority Maronite but with some notable Melkite Communties) are closely related to the Jews, even more so then the Arabs are. So I my theory is they descend from the Danites while the Muslims descend of Lebanon from the Canaaites.

And that's why I'm also looking at cities and regions that are still majority Christian rather then Muslim. 

I've been considering that the traditional identification of Biblical Hazor is wrong and that the archeological site currently known as Tel-Hazor which was destroyed by Fire about 1200 BC could be Laish. A Chronology that places Judges 18 about 1200 BC is not implausible. 

I haven't come to a final conclusion yet. 

Update May 10th: I have changed my mind on Leshem and Laish being separate location, mainly because  finally noticed Lasha in Genesis 10:19. All three of those names are clearly variations of the same name.

The Coffin of The Covenant

I want to engage in some speculation about the full Symbolism of The Ark of The Covenant. 

The Hebrew word translated Ark in reference to The Ark of The Covenant is not the same as for Noah’s Ark, for Noah’s Ark it’s a word that means barge or ship. The word used of The Ark of The Covenant however of Arown which is a bit more mysterious. 

The word is only ever used to describe two other things.  One is a collection box that was once attached to the Brazen Altar, I don’t think that is too significant.

However the first time the word Arown appears in Scripture, the first association it ever has, is also the last verse of the first book of The Bible.  Where it is translated “Coffin” when describing the burial of Joseph.

I find that interesting, especially because while Christians rarely talked about the idea of The Ark being symbolically a Coffin the idea has subconsciously always been there.  Every ancient large Church that is a Martyrium, a giant Mausoleum enshrining someone's burial place, its set follows the tendency to echo the layout of The Temple/Tabernacle in a way that places where the Body rests right where The Ark would be. From The Church of The Holy Sepulcher to St Peter’s Basilica to the ancient Martyrium of Philip at Heiropolis. 

How would the contents of The Ark fit this idea though?

I Believe in Soul Sleep, The Body and Soul and not separated during physical death, they rest together awaiting The Resurrection. 

The Soul and Spirit are also separate things in The Bible as seen in verses like Hebrews 4:12. The Spirit leaving The Body at Death is Biblically supportable if you take a certain verse in Ecclesiastes at face value, but there are issues with taking Ecclesiastes verses at face value.

Human Beings are Triune entities, Spirit and Soul and Body 1 Thessalonians 5:23. And in Hebrews 9:4 The Ark contained three things. The Jar of Manna (Exodus 16:33-34), The Rod of Aaron (Numbers 17:8-10) and the Tablets of The Law (Exodus 25:16-21). 

Exodus 16 refers to the Manna as Bread from Heaven, and in New Testament theology Bread represents The Body. 

I don’t believe Paul is saying the Jar/Pot was actually made of Gold, Exodus 16 would have mentioned that if it was, he’s saying “Pot of Gold” as an idiom for a Pot continuing something valuable which Paul then reveals to be the Manna. This word for Pot is Stamnos which the New Testament only uses here and the LXX only used in Exodus 16:33, the Hebrew word used is also unique to this one verse, but the root it comes from is the Hebrew word for “thorn” used in Job 5:5 and Proverbs 22:5 which is also the root of the word used in Numbers 33:55 and Joshua 23:13. 

Aaron’s Rod in Numbers 17 miraculously sprouted life, and is a Symbol of Aaron’s Priestly Authority. It represents the Spirit, the animating force. 

The Greek word for Soul is Psyche, The Soul Biblically is your Personhood and Personality, your Self in a sense. What the Heart and Mind represent Biblically are parts of that. 

Jeremiah 31:33 says “But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people”.  Paul quoted that in Hebrews 8:10  “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people” and Again in Hebrews 10:16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them”.

So The Tablets of The Law are symbolically The Heart and Mind, The Soul. 

When The Ark was placed in Solomon’s Temple we’re told only The Tablets of The Law were still in it, meaning the Jar and the Rod may have been removed by the Philistines when they had it, or some other point. 

In the context of this Symbolism it further strengthens my Soul Sleep view, The Soul Remains in The Grave even if the Body and Spirit have withered away. The Soul is immortal in a sense, but not in the sense Platonists think. 

Nimrod and Babel theory.

Exactly 1903 years elapsed from the founding of Babylon to the capture of Babylon by Alexander the Great. This calculation and number of years was made according to astronomical observations by Porphyry, as we find in Simplicius, in his second book "de Coelo". This he affirms to have been transmitted into Greece from Babylon by Chalisthenes at Aristotle's request.  Since Alexander captured Babylon in 331 BC that places it's founding in 2234 BC.  The so-called Weidner Chronicle (also known as ABC 19) states that Sargon of Akkad had built Babylon "in front of Akkad" (ABC 19:51).  The short chronology has Sargon reigning in 2234 BC, so these sources line up. The Babylon of Hammurabi and Nebuchadnezzar is not old enough to be the first Post-Flood city.  And if there is indeed evidence of some settlement around there prior to Sargon, maybe that is the still unidentified city of Akkad? 

On the subject of Babel's name.  Ignace Gelb argued in 1995 that original name was Babilla, of unknown meaning and origin, as there were other similarly named places in Sumer, and there are no other examples of Sumerian place-names being replaced with Akkadian translations. He deduced that it later transformed into Akkadian Bāb-ili(m), and that the Sumerian name Kan-dig̃irak was a loan translation of the Semitic folk etymology rather than the original name. So some this fits the already implied implication from what's said about Sargon, that some other place had this name first.

I used agree with David Rohl on both Enmerkar king of Uruk as Nimrod and Eridu as Babel, and I still agree that all the attempts to make Nimrod anyone more recent then Enmerkar on the Kings list are silly, including Gilgamesh who reigned later in the same dynasty with two kings between them.

When I look at the Sumerian King's List another candidate for Nimrod would be Etanna of the first Dynasty of Kish, he's defined as the first Conquer, at least in the Post-Flood world. The ten names preceding Etanna on Kish's list are names of Animals so that feels artificial inflation.  And before that is Kullassina-bel which is a phrase that means "all of them were lord" so that's clearly a memory of when Kish was a Democracy.  Kish is a name that is very arguably Cognate with Cush, even within Hebrew The Davidic Psalm 7:1 refers to a Benjamite Cush who I believe is the same person as the Kish who was the father of Saul in 1 Samuel 9:1.

However it could be possible that Etanna and Enmerkar are different names the same King was remembered by in different cities.  

Enmebaragesi of Kish a contemporary of Gilgamesh in the 17th century BC is called the first builder of Enlil's Temple at Nippur in one text. So Nippur's House of Heaven is also to young though it too had this significance transposed onto it and so maybe was also called Babel.

The Emerkar and the Lord of Aratta poem is why those two are seen as going together as it attributed the building of the Temple in Eridu to Enmerkar. But I disagree with the popular assumption that Nimrod was involved in building the Tower of Babel, Genesis doesn't describe The Tower of Babel as built by a King at all but as an act of Democracy.  A Babel was simply part of Nimrod's empire later. 

Meanwhile within the context of Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta poem Eridu's Temple is not the first ever built, the Temple of Inanna is Uruk itself has been there for awhile. Eridu's Temple is looking in the wrong direction, Abzu refers to the Abyss, while Babel's tower should be a House of Heaven. 

When Berosrus swaps out Eirdu for Babylon as the very first city it's because he is serves records form the time when Nabuchadnezzar's Babylon was the Capital, so the official propaganda inflated that city's antiquity. 

Eridu's importance in Sumerian Mythology was as the first Pre-Flood City, it was never where important things happened after The Flood. Meaning if it's in Genesis it's in chapter 4 not 10 or 11. Genesis 4:17 I believe should be translated "And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he (Enoch) builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son."  The common view that Cain founded the city is contradicted by the fact he was curses to be a vagabond till he died. The next verse tells us the name of Enoch's son was Irad, a name that could become Eridu. 

Uruk can be argued to be the first City depending on exactly how you define a city, settlements like Eridu are older, but the true fullness of what a city is was arguable was achieved by Uruk first.

https://youtu.be/7jQUwWtbFjE

https://youtu.be/4AGK0YteOE0

Uruk is also arguably a twin city. It's oldest area is the Anu District centered around it's oldest Temple to Anu the god whose name mean Heaven, then it expanded to the Eanna district built around the Temple to Inanna. Maybe when Genesis 10:10 says "the beginnings of his Kingdom were Babel and Erech" it's referring to these two separate districts of Uruk. And then after that Genesis 10 is describing the Uruk expansion which did extend as far north as Nineveh in the 4th Millennium BC. And that expansion I believe happened under Enmerkar. 

The Anu Ziggurat in Uruk was the tallest building in the world from when it was built (around 4000 BC according to mainstream archeology) till the Pyramid of Djoser was built in the 27th century BC.  I suspect it was originally just built to be the Temple of Heaven and the idea of a specific god named Anu came later. The ancient name for the Anu district was Kullaba or Kulab, and a district was also given that name in the later classical Babylon.