THE COAT OF MANY COLORS

Years ago I went to the movies and witnessed a rendering of the Bible. In this version, as I recall, many of the major events of the Bible were touched upon. This film may have been directed by Cecil B. DeMille, and its title: “The Greatest Story Ever Told.” In those days there were quite a few tales which were at least loosely based on the Bible. Therefore, I may have gotten the wrong film. What am I trying to get at?

In the film that I saw, the story of Jacob-Israel’s sons were told, featuring Joseph. In this rendering a scene depicted Joseph receiving from Jacob-Israel a “coat of many colors.” Let meet quote the King James version of the Bible at Genesis 37: 3:

Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours.

Now, in fairness I should say that this passage in the Ferrar Fenton translation of the Bible is rendered not “many colours” but as “a robe with long sleeves.” In this report I’m going to utilize the King James version, as it relates both to the film in question, as well as my subsequent citations and observations. Also, YOUNG’S ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE TO THE BIBLE [Revised Edition], on page 175, at “Coat,” indicates  at Gen. 37:3 & at Gen. 37:23, the accustomed “(many) colours.” This further confirms me in this usage. However, caveat emptor!

Now, there is very little additional description, so precisely how did this “coat of many colours” appear?

In the movie which I alluded to earlier, the coat was presented as a “rainbow” of colors. It was basically vertical lines, each approximately two inches wide, falling from shoulder to below the knees– almost to the ankles (or thereabout). The conception of this gift from Jacob-Israel as a “rainbowesque” coat was, to say the least, singular. Did it have some symbolic meaning which the general audience would not perceive? I don’t know, as a certainty, but maybe it did. Let’s not go there.

I remember two things about the movie and the coat: I accepted this interpretation without question, and my view of the coat was that it was ugly, ugly, ugly. I wouldn’t want it. I believe that the normal reaction by Joseph’s brothers is relief that they didn’t get stuck with it. Therefore, their jealousy seemed inexplicable to me. Crazy Hebrews!

As I got older and chanced upon other viewpoints about the interpretation of various parts of the Bible by people that I came to respect, this Biblical vignette stayed with me. It was as if I knew that something was very wrong here on the matter of the coat given by Jacob-Israel to Joseph. Further, I believed that a clue of importance rested in this matter of the coat. I finally progressed enough to realize that it was an emblem particularly of the House of Israel, whose primary tribes were the sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh. One should recall that it is upon the head of Ephraim that Jacob-Israel placed the due of the first-born, which is the “promises & inheritance thereof.” These, then, went to the house of Israel. When the Assyrian Captivity occurred, the “promises & inheritances thereof” went also.

This leads me to the heart of my report to you today: The migrations of Israel generally, and the migrations of the House of Israel after its forcible removal from the Northern Kingdom to north of Assyria. We do not plan to discuss here the earlier migrations and colonies established by Hebrews and Israelites. However, it is highly probable that Iberia, Hibernia, Wales and Britain were all locations visited by the Children of Isaac, son of Abraham.

However, as our focus is the coat of many colors warn by the beloved lad, Joseph, and what it may mean as an emblem, let us turn toward a remarkable discovery of recent times: The mummies of the Tarim Basin area.

According to some scholars, the earliest of the mummies found in the Tarim Basin can be dated to “around” 2000 B.C. [The Barnes Review, July/August, 2000]. These are believed to “possibly” be the ancestors of a group of people named, “Tokharians.”

“These archeological finds demonstrate a very ancient Aryan (Indo-European) presence in an area we now call part of China, which may have been responsible for the transmission of chariot use, metallurgy and weaving techniques to the various other peoples of the region, including the Chinese themselves.

“It is known that the Chinese borrowed a number of words dealing with wheels and chariots from Indo-European sources…” [The Barnes Review, supra, p.5]

Parenthetically, as the Adamic being of the Bible is highly likely to be fair, ruddy, able to blush, based on the translation of the literal meaning of “Adam,” this being seems the most likely progenitor of these ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language, which is thought to have been the ancestor of the Tokharians. One should bear in mind Biblical and Apocryphal allusions to these early times. Adam was a “scientist” and teacher, giving names to flora & fauna. One may say that he was both the physical and spiritual father of the modern era’s Linnaeas, who developed the modern division of the plant and animal worlds. Further, the civilization which proceeded from this Adamic father proceeded forth in all directions as teachers of the known “arts & crafts.” It seems reasonable that these “mummy people” are descended from them. They are certainly spreaders of knowledge. By today’s standards there efforts may seem laughable, but to the cultures of “want” all about, they probably seemed to be “magi.”

Parenthetically, I hold that this limited knowledge was spread before any flood occurred. However, the heart of knowledge remained localized in that area described as “east of Eden.” It is in that area that perversion entered the local culture, along with the advances of knowledge that led to “the mixing of strange flesh” (“ho-hum,” today). All of these things began to anger The Most High greatly. As far as this advanced culture was concerned, considering the benighted outsiders, this was “the World,” much as the U.S.A. was “the world” to soldiers in Vietnam.

Now, I don’t want to stray too far. I merely want to suggest affinities. For outside of the “the World,” colonies of Adamic people may have been set, prior to the Flood. If so, they would then bare close kinship with the Noah-Eber-Shem-Abram line. None of this is proven conclusively. However, it is “ok” to make non-doctrinal interpretations of possible scenarios which tie matters together. None is forced to believe. There is no “burning at the stake” fate awaiting “deniers.”

One should bare in mind that scientist working with various means of “dating” can and do “edit” to meet their own (and that of their colleagues) prior “certainties.” This is provable.

So, let us consider some aspects of these mummies which address their cultural markers, in part. Consider:

[Article contains photographed examples] “…a plaid woolen twill textile from a mummy burial at Qizilchoqa, near Hami. This specimen dates from between 1200 and 700 B.C. and is woven in light brown with light blue and white stripes. Below right, a reproduction of a six-color plaid twill in a garment also from Qizilchoqa, of the same era. The garment is purplish brown with white, black, red, dark blue and light blue stripes. Both these plaids bear a very strong resemblance to Scottish tartans. Elizabeth Barber, author of The Mummies of Urumchi, found so many points of similarity that she concluded it could not be a coincidence. [The Barnes Review, supra, p.7].

Indeed, only the well-financed enemies of Bible-based religion and their uninspired, peer-conscious, and deceitful scientists angrily denounce such information, as they know that there may be a re-kindling of faith in the opposite of Godlessness. Let them squirm!

Those of you who read with care noted that the time frame for these plaids was given as “between 12o0 and 700 B.C.” And, perhaps it is well to recall the time frame for the many millions of Israelites to be brought into this region by the Assyrians. Yes, they were brought into the area in the eighth century B.C. Did they possess plaid garments when they arrived? I believe they did.

Parenthetically, who brought the long-flowing robe into the lands of Canaan and of Shem? This style of clothing protected the skin from the searing heat encountered as one goes further south. The dark-skinned peoples have not required the same level of protection from the sun, as do the fair- or pink-skinned. I submit that the Adamic man, heading south after “the World” had been destroyed, developed this usage. Why? To protect their skin. Over many centuries this attire was adopted by others whose skin was darker and, strictly speaking, not as vulnerable. It became this region’s “cultural idiom” but did not begin that way.

Again, consider:

…The situation with the mummy people seems to be similar. Their cloth has survived well enough (notably from a series of mummies found near Hami, or Qumul) to show an uncanny resemblance to a series of textiles of the same age from Central Europe, woven by the ancestors of the Kelts, fellow Indo-Europeans living at the other end of Eurasia. [The Barnes Review, supra, p.6]

Parenthetically, without going into this subject except by glancing encounter, the migrations from north of Assyria westard was a slow process. However, those nearest to Greece ventured there first. those nearest China undoubtedly, in part, went eastward. Given the uncertainty of “scientific” dating, there is plenty of time to have elements of the same people widely spread. The English and their colonists can attest to that. Therefore, it is certainly possible for the same “plaid-wearing” people north of Assyria to continue their plaid-wearing in the area close to China and in Central Europe.

Further, other Hebrew and Israelites, especially from the loin of Judah, were colonizing the “western isles.” They, too, continued to wear their plaids. Some may have colonized Brittany. Please recall that the root of Iberia & Hibernia is the same as “Eber,” the man who gave his name to the Hebrews.

From the tribe of Dan, which seems to have eluded the Assyrian Captivity in large part, elements seemed to have colonized wide-spread areas in the southern European area. It’s name can be found from the Don river to the Danube river. Recall please that the tribe of Dan was a sea-faring people. Small wonder, then, that the name is found at “Dan-mark” [Denmark]. Also, bear in mind that the Hebrew tongue did not carry a vowel indicator, so the name also appears as “Dan,” “Don,” “Dun(n),” “Din,” “Den,” and is found in names such as “Dunkirk.” Folks, sailors get around!

There are also language affinities which I’ll mention briefly. Consider:

Lexical affinities of Tokharian with Italo-Keltic give evidence that the speakers of these languages had associated in the Indo-European homeland before the Tokharians began their migration eastward and the Kelts and Italic peoples westward. Specifically, linguists now believe that Tokharian languages are even more closely related to the Keltic languages than are the Italic languages, long regarded as a sister group of languages to Keltic. [The Barnes Review, supra, p.9]

This report has gotten a bit longer than I had planned. But I believe that names, languages, clothing preferences, and the known migrations lead to a view of oneness. These are kinfolks.

Although it goes back much further than a single piece of clothing, I believe Joseph’s “coat of many colors” symbolizes a sort of Divine Emblem, saying: Look and See My Glory in a Gifted Coat!  Abraham was to become a father of many nations, and his seed would be as countless as the grains of sand at sea’s edge. According to Josephus, the Northern tribes were beyond count somewhere beyond the Assyrians. Even the fact of numbers argues that migration to the empty Europe was wise. Their ancestors would do the same thing in North America. And everywhere they went, they carried their own version of the “coat of many colors,” –typically plaid.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2007.