reply to post by Tayesin
problem was local interpretation of an oral history. enki wasn't the only "serpent", there was an entire race of them. check the translation of
the word seraph
Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Search Results
Result of search for "seraph":
8314 saraph saw-rawf' from 8313; burning, i.e. (figuratively) poisonous (serpent); specifically, a saraph or symbolical creature (from their copper
color):--fiery (serpent), seraph.
www.eliyah.com...
seraph is singular for seraphim. check translation of seraphim
Divine creatures from the Old Testament, associated with the Cherubim, and later taken to be angels. The root of Seraphim comes either from the Hebrew
verb saraph ('to burn') or the Hebrew noun saraph (a fiery, flying serpent). Because the term appears several times with reference to the serpents
encountered in the wilderness (Num. 21.8, Deut. 8.15; Isa. 14.29; 30.6), it has often been understood to refer to "fiery serpents." From this it has
also often been proposed that the seraphim were serpentine in form and in some sense "fiery" creatures or associated with fire.
www.pantheon.org...
what happened was, the oral histories don't include the seraphim as a race of physical beings, but as a race of spirit beings (angelic race). i
believe this is both true and not quite true. but since they had condensed their histories due to the fact they had been maintained by oral tradition
(try memorizing the pentateuch and see how much you can retain), they just touched on the most important or what they thought to be the most important
points at the time.
that's my theory, based on the data i have.
i also don't think references to burning or fiery are actually examples of fire. i think they are examples of glowing, perhaps due to the materials
they were wearing or for some other reason. remember the translations into english assume further, and english doesn't do the hebrew language
justice. hebrew can express several ideas at once, in one word. english can't/doesn't do that.
i believe the "scorpion men" referenced in the epic of gilgamesh (tablet IX), are the same thing.. they are seraphim (cherubim) who are a race of
beings, who predated humans. they appear to be reptilian in appearance, based on the text translations and artifacts.
the scorpion men description may be from the same visual source as the wings of the seraphim/cherubim (think several wings vs. several legs, which has
its counterpart in hindu deities with more than one set of arms). there is more than one race of cherubim, seraphim are one of those races. not all
seraphim are considered fallen, but from the looks of it, all are some type of reptilian race.
i sincerely believe that many of the ancient texts of the hindu and the egyptians support the biblical, sumerian, akkadian and babylonian accounts.
it's just translation errors, lack of comparative analysis and the long burial of Sumer, which is somewhat of a rosetta stone that ties the ancient
histories to each other, that has caused so much confusion on the subject.
also, sitchin is not the only scholar to have translated the sumerian texts. at least 2 other universities have been translating them for awhile now
and before sitchin was samuel noah kramer (which see).
[edit on 27-10-2008 by undo]