Early Migration

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:16 pm

Just asking Marduk, as I (dare I say it) have little interest in Sumeria etc, why do you appear in these threads to accept Sumerian texts but not Hebrew?
Just asking.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:36 pm

as in you mean why do I accept mesopotamian texts (not just Sumerian) over those of the hebrews
well firstly because the vast majority of mesopotamian texts are not religious in nature and are not written to convey a religious moral but rather to entertain
as such they are clearly just stories
and secondly
because its these stories that later appear in hebrew texts claimed to be the word of God dictated to moses around 1500bce when in many cases they had been in existence for a thousand years or more by that point
take the story of Noah for example and compare it to the flood portion of the epic of Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.

Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth

Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.

Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth

Genesus was written around 600bce
this version of Gilgamesh was written at least 1700years earlier around 2300bce.

so the hebrews claim to have a genuine text dictated by god which therefore is perfect as its written my an omnipotent omnicogniscent monotheistic deity doesn't hold water
does it

this is just one example of "Borrowing" from a mesopotamian (in this case akkadian) text by the hebrews, there are hundreds more

even names that are supposedly solely of Hebrew origin turn up thousands of years earlier
such as
Eden which is sumerian for mountain steppe
http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/epsd/e1199.html
Adam which is sumerian for steppe dweller
http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/epsd/e135.html
Satan (SA.AN) which is sumerian for enemy/Equal to God/heaven
http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/epsd/e4600.html
http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/epsd/e347.html

these are just three examples you may recognise from your biblical training

there are hundreds more
all these words are accepted by Biblical scholars as being loan words in Hebrew from a mesopotamian source which is usually Sumerian because it was the first of three cultures in that region
now if they accept that these words are of Mesopotamian origin they don't often mention that the stories they later appear in are also of Mesopotamian origin
apparently religions don't like people saying that about them
that they are basically worshipping a pagan flood god who the Babylonians had the sense to stop worshipping 3900 years ago because he was a god of wrath
and you know those Babylonians right
all they cared about was love

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:45 pm

Fair comment Marduk, bar for one point. An early writing is hardly proof of origin is it?
The first writings of the Aboriginal Dream Time was in English, the Native American tales mainly likewise and South American ones in Spanish. All early versions of the Bible in the UK were in Latin, doesn't exactly make a case for a Roman origin.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:54 pm

An early writing is hardly proof of origin is it?

in this case it is
because the characters in the Mesopotamian texts are fully mesopotamian
and because these stories that appear in Babylonian texts are retellings of stories of Akkadian texts which in turn are retellings of stories in Sumerian texts
whatever way you want to look at it they didn't originate with the Hebrews
who coincedentally were enslaved en masse by the babylonians at the exact same time as the bible was first compiled

early versions of the Bible in the UK were in Latin, doesn't exactly make a case for a Roman origin

the Bible in England does originate in Rome
the Bible in Rome originates in Greece
the bible in greece origiantes in Israel
you need to understand the entire history of the writing Digit
if you don't then yes just because its written in a different language doesnt mean it originates with that
but when you do the answer is quite clear

so what you'll need to do to prove your theory that the sumerians werent the first civilisation to write these stories down is find a copy of say "the flood story" in a text earlier than the sumerian one
good luck with that
the Sumerians originated writing

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:01 pm

I never suggested that the Hebrews originated anything Steve, and your argument for earlier texts completely ignores the fact that even the earliest texts could be the telling of stories that pre dated scripts by many years. So again the earliest writers are not proven as originators.
That is a logical deduction, if you have a LOGICAL counter suggestion, fine.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:04 pm

I never suggested that the Hebrews originated anything Steve, and your argument for earlier texts completely ignores the fact that even the earliest texts could be the telling of stories that pre dated scripts by many years. So again the earliest writers are not proven as originators.

duh
I am not arguing that the Sumerians were the first to make up these stories
just that they were the first to write them down
I am arguing that the Hebrews weren't the originators of these stories which is what they are actually claiming
Logic Digit is only valid when you actually understand the argument
as you don't
your logic is slightly flawed
or are you just being obtuse again

you asked me a question
I answered it
if you don't like the answer thats fine
but instead of moving the goalposts why don't you actually do some research yourself
if you do you will reach the same conclusion as me
because I have studied this culture
as you already know

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:08 pm

I wonder why only you manage to mis understand me Steve, is it natural or an aquired skill?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:12 pm

oh so now you have transference
this gets better and better
keep taking the pills

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:14 pm

Do I? Is it contagious?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:20 pm

no its never contagious
especially when someone notices you've got it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transference

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:28 pm

O.K....shew...everything's back to normal between you guys.

For a moment you guys were scaring me yesterday...

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:40 pm

So I'll get over it then? Which tablets do you suggest?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:41 pm

Which tablets do you suggest?

how about the Enuma Elish (hahahah babylonian in joke)

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:40 pm

The sumerians wrote it first and the hebrews redacted it. Its been the same refrain since I've joined the forum. At least you and I agree that the stories actually predate the sumerians/akkadians writing it down.

I think one thing that is easily overlooked, is, even the bible for all of its alledged redaction, the early 'history' starts where? Sumeria. Its easy to look at them now as separate peoples and cultures but it wasn't always so. These hebrews are basically semites who went up the euphrates and walked southwest from Sumeria. They have common origins. So in a way when you are talking about the sumerians 3000bce, you are talking about the future hebrews, 3000bce.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:56 pm

These hebrews are basically semites who went up the euphrates and walked southwest from Sumeria

either your geography is screwed up or mine is or "these hebrews was"
shall we take a vote ?