Yahweh...Enki in disguise?

Originally posted by Deetermined

This appears to be the exact same reason why there are differences in the story of how different languages came to be and the Tower of Babel in Genesis 10 vs. Genesis 11. And I would imagine, that's also the reason why people claim that there are differences in Creation from Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2.

Here is a pic explaining the 3 different types of authors credited for writing the Books of Moses

On another note, my mythologies professor also mentioned that one way to show importance of something is by making it first or last in a story.

Just thought I would throw that out there.

Originally posted by IntrinsicMotivation
reply to post by undo

 

In that same textbook I am referencing also has a chapter dedicated to the Epic of Gilgamesh. I will read back through it when I get home and look for reference of this flood weapon.

But if I recall correctly, there is no mention of Enki or any other name derivatives of him in the story. I do think Enlil is mentioned though (if I am wrong about that I will state so as soon as I get home to the material).

As promised I take back my temporary claim that Enki was not mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh. He appears in Tablet XI which deals with Ut-napishtim’s Story and the flood.

I am not going to type this whole account but will list the page # and the line number of the epic/poem.

"Introduction to Mythology - Contemporary Approaches to Classical and World Myths 3rd ed. by Thury and Devinney"

page 221 starting with line #960
Ut-napishtim spoke to him, to Gilgamesh,
“Let me reveal to you a closely guarded matter, Gilgamesh,
And let me tell you the secret of the gods.
Shuruppak is a city that you yourself know,
Situated on the bank of the Euphrates.
That city was already old when the gods within it
Decided that the great gods should make it flood.
There was Anu their father,
Warrior Ellil/ Enlil their counselor,
Ninurta was their chamberlain,
Ennugi their canal-controller.
Far-sighted Ea (Enki) swore the oath of secrecy with them,
So he repeated their speech to a reed hut,

As side note in the textbook says this about the last line

”So he repeated their speech to a reed hut” – Because he has sworn an oath to secrecy, Ea (Enki) must speak to Ut-napishtim’s house, not to the person.

Picking back up on line 981 with Ea speaking to the reed house

page 222 line 981
The boat that you are to build
Shall have her dimensions in proportion,
Her width and length shall be in harmony,
Roof her like the Apsu.

Side note in text explaining the last line

” Roof her like the Apsu.” – Apsu is the husband of Tiamat in Enuma Elish as well as the area of sweet water beneath the earth. Like Gilgamesh, Enuma Elish was a central story for the people of Mesopotamia, and, despite conquerors’ installing new dynasties, the stories often share particular figures, deities, events, and mores.

Lines 1080 through 1100 deal with Enlil showing up furious that there are survivors of the flood and wants to know who was responsible.

page 224 line 1089
‘What sort of life survived? No man should have lived through the destruction!’
Ninurta made his voice heard and spoke,
He said to the warrior Ellil/ Enlil,
“Who other than Ea would have done such a thing?
For Ea can do everything!”
Ea made his voice heard and spoke,
He said to the warrior Ellil/ Enlil,
‘You are the sage of the gods, warrior,
So how, O how, could you fail to consult, and impose the flood?

A side note in textbook addressing last lines

”Ea…said to the warrior Ellil/ Enlil” – The god of wisdom chastises Ellil/ Enlil for bringing the flood “so senselessly,” that is, because of his rage that the Bull of Heaven has been slain. Ea seems to argue for a more just treatment of humans by gods.

So here is Enlil causing the flood, Ea/ Enki chastising Enlil’s actions and telling him to show more compassion or just treatment towards humans.

OT, Yahweh causes the flood, and that as I just showed is Enlil. Enlil’s rage also lines up with the OT god Yahweh.

Enlil/ Ellil/ Bal/ Marduk (Same Person) would become king of the gods. Once again lines up with “There shalt be no other before me.”

Originally posted by undo
Tiamat also has been claimed to be cognate with Northwest Semitic tehom (תהום) (the deeps, abyss), in the Book of Genesis 1:2.[8]

en.wikipedia.org...

abyss=abzu so, tiamat = abzu.

I am not a fan of Wikipedia but did read the page you linked. I do not see how you are drawing your conclusions. If anything your Wikipedia page strengthens my points I have been making, although it is still Wikipedia.

Here are some snippets from the page you linked.

Tiamat
In Mesopotamian Religion (Sumerian, Assyrian, Akkadian and Babylonian), Tiamat is a chaos monster, a primordial goddess of the ocean, mating with Abzû (the god of fresh water) to produce younger gods. It is suggested that there are two parts to the Tiamat mythos, the first in which Tiamat is 'creatrix', through a "Sacred marriage" between salt and fresh water, peacefully creating the cosmos through successive generations. In the second "Chaoskampf" Tiamat is considered the monstrous embodiment of primordial chaos.[1] Although there are no early precedents for it, some sources identify her with images of a sea serpent or dragon.[2] In the Enûma Elish, the Babylonian epic of creation, she gives birth to the first generation of deities; she later makes war upon them and is killed by the storm-god Marduk. The heavens and the earth are formed from her divided body.

Etymology
Thorkild Jacobsen[3] and Walter Burkert both argue for a connection with the Akkadian word for sea, tâmtu, following an early form, ti'amtum.[4]
Burkert continues by making a linguistic connection to Tethys. He finds the later form, thalatth, to be related clearly to Greek Θάλαττα (thalatta) or Θάλασσα (thalassa), "sea". The Babylonian epic Enuma Elish is named for its incipit: "When above" the heavens did not yet exist nor the earth below, Apsu the freshwater ocean was there, "the first, the begetter", and Tiamat, the saltwater sea, "she who bore them all"; they were "mixing their waters". It is thought that female deities are older than male ones in Mesopotamia and Tiamat may have begun as part of the cult of Nammu, a female principle of a watery creative force, with equally strong connections to the underworld, which predates the appearance of Ea-Enki.[5]

Harriet Crawford finds this "mixing of the waters" to be a natural feature of the middle Persian Gulf, where fresh waters from the Arabian aquifer mix and mingle with the salt waters of the sea.[6] This characteristic is especially true of the region of Bahrain, whose name in Arabic means "two seas", and which is thought to be the site of Dilmun, the original site of the Sumerian creation beliefs.[7] The difference in density of salt and fresh water drives a perceptible separation.

Mythology
Abzu (or Apsû) fathered upon Tiamat the elder deities Lahmu and Lahamu (masc. the "hairy"), a title given to the gatekeepers at Enki's Abzu/E'engurra-temple in Eridu. Lahmu and Lahamu, in turn, were the parents of the 'ends' of the heavens (Anshar, from an = heaven, shár = horizon, end) and the earth (Kishar); Anshar and Kishar were considered to meet at the horizon, becoming, thereby, the parents of Anu (the Heavens, Biblical "Shemayim") and Ki (the Earth, Biblical "Eretz" created by Elohim in Genesis 1:1).

Tiamat was the "shining" personification of salt water who roared and smote in the chaos of original creation. She and Apsu filled the cosmic abyss with the primeval waters. She is "Ummu-Hubur who formed all things".
In the myth recorded on cuneiform tablets, the deity Enki (later Ea) believed correctly that Apsu, upset with the chaos they created, was planning to murder the younger deities; and so captured him, holding him prisoner beneath is temple the E-Abzu. This angered Kingu, their son, who reported the event to Tiamat, whereupon she fashioned eleven monsters to battle the deities in order to avenge Apsu's death.

See in that last one that Abzu (or Apsu) fathered upon (or impregnated) Tiamat.

This is the problem with Wikipedia, The last part concerning mythology of Tiamat is not cited. I repeat, NOT CITED. Anyone can go and type what they want in there.

If you are going to use wikipedia, do not reference it, but follow the citation to the actual source and quote that.

I have seen many college students fail research papers because of this.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


I don't really have much to say about Ea and YHVH, as my personal belief is that YHVH is an amalgamation of a variety of Supreme Gods (Enlil, Enki, Il, Zeus, etc).

But, I do want to point out that Enki and Inanna do not actually have a destructive rivalry in Sumerian literature. Often times Enki views Inanna as his own daughter (despite her being the daughter of Nanna, who was the son of Enlil).

In the myth of Enki establishing world order, after he realizes he has overlooked assigning function to Inanna, he heaps mounds of influential positions on her. Most of the cults of Inanna stem from things which Enki bestowed upon her during this myth.

In my own reading of the myth where Inanna takes the Me from Enki, I found it quite humorous that Enki continually sends Isimud with only enough direction to catch Inanna and Ninšubur, but never with enough instruction to bring them back. In the event that Ninšubur doesn't free the boat, Isimud releases it and returns to Enki, asking what he is supposed to do after he catches them. Almost as if Enki is letting Inanna escape. This is more telling when you realize that Enki has Ninurta (the Champion of Sumer) at his disposal. The last time that the Me were stolen (by the Anžu bird), Enki sent Ninurta with the clear instruction of defeating everyone who stood between him and the Anžu bird. Clearly if Enki desired to have the Me returned to him he would have sent Ninurta to reclaim them.

The most telling example of all (to me) coming from the Descent of Inanna myth, where Enlil, Nanna, and all the other Anunnaki deny Ninšubur when she requests their aid in rescuing Inanna. It is only Enki who frets over her imprisonment (most likely because he recognizes the peril of having the Queen of Life be dead, while the Queen of Death yet lives). It is Enki who creates the Galatur and Kurgarra insects who bring the Food of Life and the Water of Life to Inanna, resurrecting her, and freeing her from the Law of Irkalla. This is a definite sign of love and respect, as Enki would not let Inanna's roles be unfilled.

While the archaeological evidence suggests a deep-rooted disgust toward the cult of the Queen of Heaven, I don't think that YHVH was Ea, because Ea/Enki displays no such distaste toward Inanna and her antics. In fact, in Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, and the Levant (where Enki was known as A'a) the cult of the Queen of Heaven thrived. Inanna, Ištar, Astarte/Aštoreth, Anat, Qadeš, and Šauška were all modeled on (or WERE) Inanna traveling throughout the ancient Near East. It was really only the Jews, when they had enough of an All-Father developed, who disliked the cult of the Queen of Heaven.



Anyway, I don't think Enki/Ea developed into YHVH. I think the Jews modeled YHVH on Ea, and other semitic Supreme Gods. Just the theory I've arrived at in my own research though.


~ Wandering Scribe

Well said Wandering Scribe

I forgot to add in my post concerning Tiamat that at one point in time many worshipped a feminine goddess.

We have “His Story” but what happened to “Her Story?”

My opinion still is that Enlil is the closest counterpart to Yahweh of the Old Testament
While Enki seems to get portrayed as the serpent.

Consider this, if you have announced yourself king of the gods (Enlil/ Marduk) and are the military leader (Lord of the Command) does it not make sense that you would portray your closest rival to this claim as your enemy (Enki/ serpent/ Lucifer/ devil)?

I would call that some good propaganda

Edited to add: To the victor goes the spoils

intrinisic motivation

i just provided the evidence that abzu was not a deity. that it was in fact, related to water and is instead a thing called the abyss

tiamat didn't exist before babylon, some scholars believe tiamat to be the word, tehom, the deep, a reference in genesis 1:2. marduk's priests made her up from the abzu and gave her a separate name, then deified both her and abzu when originally they were listed as one thing and always called abzu, the abyss . it doesn't matter who put that in wikipedia, if the word IS tehom, then it is. lol

samuel noah kramer said, in the text called ENKI BUILDS THE E.ENGURRA

The lord of the abyss, the king Enki, Enki the Lord who decrees the fates, Built his house of silver and lapis lazuli; Its silver and lapis lazuli, like sparkling light, The father fashioned fittingly in the abyss.

[...]

Then Enki raises the city of Eridu from the abyss and makes it float over the water like a lofty mountain.

-----------

the E.Abzu was interchangeably called the E.Engurra and the E.Nun.
this latter is evidence of the Abzu in egyptian writings and as such, takes a similar position of
chaotic water or primordial water from which the first mountain rose.

Nu (/nuː/; "watery one") or Nun (/nʌn/ or /nuːn/; "inert one") is the deification of the primordial watery abyss in Egyptian mythology. In the Ogdoad cosmogony, the word nu means "abyss".
en.wikipedia.org...

oh oh, here's something else i forgot to add:

tiamat as evidence of homo sapien matriarchy is a misnomer. the mother goddess statues, prior to the flood, were all reptilians, with rows of scales and clawed feet, who gave birth to babies with webbed hands and elongated skulls. lol

i think the closest we get to matriarchy is egypt, and then only because men and women were considered to be equal, even though only a couple women were pharaohs.

catal hoyuk mother goddess is a reptilian that was found without a head and missing the claws on her feet



so the museum got busy with it, and put a human head on it, and tried to make her feet look like normal human feet. compare the feet between the two pictures. they tampered with the evidence. notice also the thick, sharp folds of the abdomen, just as you would see on a large reptile. there's tons of evidence that mother goddess statues that predate the black sea flood are not human beings.



i've darkened in her actual foot. missing the claws

reply to post by undo


@ Undo. I did not catch the “samuel noah Kramer” in the link. But I just looked it up and this is what you are talking about ENKI BUILDS THE E-ENGURRA in ERIDU…

The problem is that I cannot find the original printing of this source to view it in full.

Here is the source data-- Kramer, Samuel Noah (1988) Sumerian Mythology, University of Pennsylvania Press, West Port, Connecticut.

All I find is the same 2 paragraphs on various websites, and the one I linked is from the University of Texas.

I just do not see any type of contribution (opinion) from the author Samuel Noah Kramer, and as so I am on the fence about it. If you can find more on this before I do, please post or send me a u2u.

I am trying to keep Sitchin out of this, although he gives a better account of the story mentioned above in his book “The Lost Realms” starting in chapter 12 on page 253 titled: Gods Of The Golden Tears.

Concerning Tiamat. This is what it says in

"Introduction to Mythology - Contemporary Approaches to Classical and World Myths 3rd ed. by Thury and Devinney"

page 65
THE CHARACTER AND EVOLUTION OF TIAMAT
As we read Enuma Elish, we see how the characterization of Tiamat evolves, giving us insights into the beliefs of ancient Mesopotamian society. In the first lines, Tiamat is described neutrally, if not positively, as the primordial salt water, a necessary component of creation of the world. In fact this identification is so strong that some versions of the manuscript actually use the word “sea” instead of “Tiamat” (Jacobsen 105).

Quick pause to give the Jacobsen citation for those who want to read it.

Jacobsen, Thorkild. “The Battle Between Marduk and Tiamat.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 88.1 (1968): 104-108.

Picking back up with character and evolution of Tiamat

When Apsu explains his distress at the noise made by their offspring, Tiamat reacts maternally, defending the exuberance of their young. And later her plan to avenge Apsu’s death at the hands of Ea can be seen as rooted in loyalty. However, as she prepares for his battle, we see her giving birth to giant venomous snakes, contributing dragons, a rabid dog, demons, and other monstrous creatures, and making ferocious dragons look like gods, in order to deceive her opponents. And finally in battle with Marduk, she is portrayed as totally monstrous, with the physical characteristics of lower creatures and the raging instincts of a wild animal.
This evolution of Tiamat from primordial mother to monstrous adversary who relies on magic spells and demons revels a shift in viewpoint from a quasi-matriarchal to patriarchal society. Her contributions to society remains, as Marduk creates the world from her body parts. She retains the role of ultimate mother, but the authoritative position of creator is firmly attributed to her male progeny.

Here goes a picture and text that accompanied this section

reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation


I was going to post something along the lines of how the myths evolved from Sumer to Babylon, changing based on the changing political climates. It would have outlined something similar to what you quoted. That being so, I've simply starred your post, and am responding here to show my support for the theory that Tiamat began as a matriarchal creatrix, but was demonized by growing patriarchal prowess within the culture.

Another good example of this is looking back at the earliest Sumerian mythology:

An is the sky-god, occasionally depicted as a bull (form, matter, living-essence). Often overlooked are the mates of An, all three of them:

01: Antu: the Heavens.
02: Nammu: the Abyss/Sea.
03: Uraš: the Earth.

Antu, Nammu, and Uraš are feminine forces. Not necessarily physical goddesses, but abstract concepts. The physicality comes from the masculine principle (An).

The earliest Sumerian mythology, then, suggests that the Divine Feminine, or Great Mother as it would later come to be called, was transcendent, a noumenon; while the Divine Masculine, or All-Father, was immanent, part of the phenomenal world.

With the rise of God-Kings, Bull-Kings, Pharaohs, and other male-dominated political constructs the transcendent Feminine needed to be brought down, subjugated, controlled, and conquered. Tiamat was the result.

Nammu (the Sea) was the Sumerian feminine who mated with An giving birth to Enlil, Nudimmud/Enki, and Nimah/Ninḫursag. When the Babylonians were re-modeling Sumerian mythology to blend in with their new State God, Marduk, they turned Nammu (the transcendent Feminine Sea) into Tiamat, an immanent Feminine Goddess of the sea. Then they had Marduk overcome her, bind her, and use her transcendental nature to form the cosmos... well, sea and sky at least.

It was propaganda.

The Goddess, or Divine Feminine is, and always has been, transcendent, existing and operating outside of the Realm (reality). It is the God who exists within space and time. At least, that is the way the polarity is supposed to be balanced. The Jews and Christians kind of screwed that up by trying to remove the Divine Feminine entirely, so that God was both transcendent and immanent.

...and no where in there are their Lizard-People, reptilians, or any of that other hokum.



~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by undo


The naked-woman flanked by lions motif is a very prolific images throughout the ancient Near East. Here's a little images of various figures who inspired/were inspired by the Çatalhöyük mother-goddess:



(clicking the thumbnail will make the image much larger. Going from left-to-right starting at the top we have:

01. Inanna
02. Inanna
03. Ištar / Lillith
04. Qadeš
05. Astarte
06. Astarte
07. Kybele
08. Freyja

I was going to include Šauška, the "Hurrian Ištar", but I couldn't make her image fit comfortably. She also rides astride a lion.

You'll notice that all of these goddesses, including Ištar with her talon-feet, have HUMAN heads. A good majority of them are also the Queen of Heaven, the goddess of sacred places, or the Earth Mother.

You state that the researchers who gave the Çatalhöyük statue a human head/hands were wrong. Archaeological evidence would point to YOU being wrong. The goddess associated with lions and other wild animals ALWAYS has a human head. The only time she has any animal features is in Babylon, when Ištar was mixed up with the Jewish "Lillith" as the mother of night demons.


~ Wandering Scribe

For those who have not read this I will include it here.

From Zecharia Sitchin’s “The Lost Realms.”

(Disclaimer, while an interesting take on events, I personally do not subscribe to everything Sitchin has said; although I have verified some things he has said in scholarly sources. I will say RIP to Zecharia because he helped turn me on to a bigger picture )

Ch 12 page 253
GODS OF THE GOLDEN TEARS
Sometime after 4000 B.C. the great Anu, ruler of Niburu, came to Earth on a state visit.

It was not the first time he had made the arduous space journey. Some 440,000 Earth years earlier—a mere 122 years in terms of Nibiru—his firstborn son, Enki, had led the first group of fifty Anunnaki to Earth to obtain the gold with which this seventh planet was blessed. On Nibiru, nature and technological usages had combined to thin out and damage the planet’s atmosphere, an atmosphere needed not only for breathing but that also had acted to envelop the planet into a greenhouse, preventing its inner-generated heat from dissipating. And only by suspending gold particles high above Nibiru, its scientist concluded, could Nibiru be saved from becoming a frozen and lifeless globe.

Seeing how this is a conspiracy forum, that last part sure sounds like Chem Trailing (the spraying of elements into the atmosphere.)

Continuing on

Enki, the brilliant scientist that he was, splashed down in the Persian Gulf and established his base, Eridu, on its shores. His plan was to obtain the gold by extracting it from the gulfs waters; but not enough was attained that way, and the crisis on Nibiru deepened. Tired of Enki’s assurances that he would make the project a success, Anu came to Earth to see things for himself. He had with him his heir apparent, Enlil: though not the firstborn, Enlil was entitled to succession because his mother, Antu, was a half-sister of Anu. He lacked the scientific brilliance of Enki, but was an excellent administrator; not fascinated with the mysteries of nature, but one believing in taking charge and getting things done. And the thing to do, all the studies indicated, was to get gold by mining it where it was abundant: in southern Africa.

Bitter arguments broke out not only regarding the project itself, but also between the rival half-brothers. Anu even thought of staying on Earth and letting one of his sons act as regent on Nibiru; but the idea only caused more discord. Finally they drew lots. Enki was to go to Africa and organize the mining; Enlil was to stay in E.DIN (Mesopotamia), build the necessary facilities for refining the ores for shipping the gold back to Nibiru. And Anu returned to the planet of the Anunnaki. That was the first visit.

And then there was the second visit, brought about by another emergency. Forty Nibiru-years after the first landing, the Anunnaki who were assigned to work in the gold mines mutinied.

While it goes into detail of the events and the solution to the problem, those who have read into his work should have an idea of where this is going

From the bottom of page 254 I will conclude the post with this

And so it was that LULU AMELU, the “Mixtured Worker,” was created, out of genetic manipulation and the fertilization of an Apewoman’s egg in a laboratory flask. The hybrids could not procreate; female Anunnaki had to act each time as birth-goddesses. But Enki and Ninharsag perfected them through trial and error until the perfect model was achieved. They named him Adam, “He Of Earth—Earthling.

That last paragraph from Sitchin’s perspective answers some things brought up in this thread.

you have to remain consistent. you can't jump 500 years down the road, show a pic of a female human with bird feet on a lion and claim that is the same thing as a reptilian on a throne before the flood. it obscures discovery in much the same way as the museum curators putting a fake human head on the catal hayuk statue and fake human feet. the evidence needs to remain consistent with its advent. evolution of the concept is fine, provided it's talking about the same species evolving. do you suppose we evolved from reptilians? if not, then later human versions are attempts at claiming the ancient female reptilian dominance. i mean, let's be realistic. if you look at the cultures in which inana was prominent, the human women of the culture certainly didn't have dominance of any kind, whatsoever.

the illusion that pagan religions were female friendly, is laughable. it's all the same banana. all over the world, women have been treated to the same degradation and lowering of worth, which i had theorized was a result of enlil's total disdain for humans and since human females create more humans, they were his first target. it isn't until the advent of egypt and later jesus (have to skip over the holy roman empire as they were like trademark enlil-ites posing as enki-ites), that men start to realize their female counterparts are not floor mats or walking wombs with holes they can stick things in. and in those places where enlil's teachings are the strongest, they are still viewed as subhuman sex dummies, even their male children have precedence over them. it's ridiculous.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


It would make sense that a proof of Yahweh exists/existed written (believable) to even begin a debate regarding Enlil, Enki and prodgeny. Has anyone spoken to Yahweh lately (where he lives now/mope-ing because he missed an important birthday) otherwise the debate as I see it is MUTE and master-vibrational.

Originally posted by vethumanbeing
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

It would make sense that a proof of Yahweh exists/existed to even begin a debate regarding Enlil, Enki and prodgeny. Has anyone proven Yahweh lives now/mope or lived otherwise the debate as I see it is MUTE and masterbratorial.

well if you believe sitchin, the anunnaki have long lives (in the thousands of years) but are not eternal. when they die from old age, their offspring take their place, and all of this is geared around the precession of the equinoxes. for example, he states that we are exiting the age of pisces, which was ruled by christ and entering the age of aquarius, which will be ruled by his anunnaki replacement. i think he's wrong. jesus did not rule this age. if he had, we would all be blissfully aware of it.

instead it was ruled by a group of enlil-ites (same old same old) known as the holy roman empire who posed as enki-ites, heralding his return. they didn't go around the world preaching the good news,. they went around the world destroying and stealing the wealth of whole countries, enslaving the people and indoctrinating them in the pope's edicts not jesus' teachings. they hid the new testament. most people had no idea what was in the text. when it was finally discovered, people revolted enmasse, the thing was printed in english for the first time and spread all over the place. this lead to the enlightenment (long story).

anyway, i think sitchin's idea of precession of the equinoxes marking the end of one anunnaki ruler in favor of another, is hogwash. if anything, the precession marks when enlil's next big planetary reboot is approaching. notice how the enlil-ites, like the muslims are gaining favor now (even atheists and pagans are supporting them) and how they plan on taking over the whole planet, via forced indoctrination and are deliberately setting up house in non muslim lands, demanding special treatment (and getting it) at the expense of literally, everyone else.

nothing, short of hard core occult teaching of the enlil variety, could get people all over the world, of different backgrounds, to agree that islam should be allowed to flourish unabated in their countries, at the expense of all their fellow countrymen and women, and even while their women are being raped in the streets. this is nothing short of bizarre and everybody knows it.

reply to post by undo

you have to remain consistent.

The images of Inanna, Ištar, Astarte, Qadeš, Šauška, Kybele, and Freyja span from 3000 BC, until the modern age in increments of 100-300 years apart.

They are consistent.

In fact, let me clue you in to the period of worship for these figures:

Inanna (Summer/Akkad) c. 3500 BC until 1750 BC
Ištar (Babylon/Assyria) c. 2500 BC until 200 AD
Qadeš (Syria, Egypt) C. 1700 BC until 400 AD
Astarte (Phoenicia) c. 1500 BC until 200 BC
Kybele (Anatolia: Phrygia) c. 1500 BC until 400 AD
Šauška (Anatolia: Hittite/Hurrian) c. 1350 BC until 1100 BC
Aštoreth (Israel, Lebanon) c. 1200 BC until 200 BC
Freyja (Germany, Iceland) c. 500 BC until 1100 AD

There is the possibility of a clear line from 3500 BC until 1100 AD for the naked-woman astride a lion motif. Not only that, but, looking at the cultic worship periods you can even trace the motif from Sumer, north into the Levant, west to Egypt and north to Anatolia, where it was adopted by pre-classical Greece, which spread to Rome, and from Rome into the Celtic and Norse worldview. The whole of the ancient world.

Consistency.

you can't jump 500 years down the road, show a pic of a female human with bird feet on a lion and claim that is the same thing as a reptilian on a throne before the flood.

No, what you can't do is discard 5000 years of women-on-lions, and instead make up this grandiose claim of lizard-people which has NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE.

You have to ignore Sumerian, Babylonian/Assyrian, Canaanite/Phoenician, Syrian, Jewish, Hittite/Hurrian, Anatolian, Greco-Roman, and Norse mythology to arrive at your conclusion.

If you go by the consistent record of archaeology which we have for these cultures, then the mother goddess of Çatalhöyük, like Kybele (who developed in the same cultural region), will have a human head, human hands, and human feet while being flanked by lions/large felines.

it obscures discovery in much the same way as the museum curators putting a fake human head on the catal hayuk statue and fake human feet. the evidence needs to remain consistent with its advent.

The Çatalhöyük statue has no head, and no feet. The archaeological record for the land after Çatalhöyük demonstrates human-headed women with human feet. Your claim is the one attempting to obscure history.

Show me a reptile's head on a human body. Show me more than one. Show me an entire culture whose artwork consists of reptile-heads on human bodies. Not supposition, not Zecharia Sitchin, not the "Ancient Aliens" TV show, but hard facts, existent statues, etc.

I'll be waiting.

he illusion that pagan religions were female friendly, is laughable.

Blah, blah, blah.

Women could own land and slaves in Sumer.
Women could be Pharaoh in Egypt.

Two examples of women having equal say/power to men in ancient cultures. Only in Semitic cultures were women subjugated (probably because the Semitic priests so greatly feared the power of the Divine Feminine, as my earlier post suggests).



~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


no, pre black sea flood is before 3000 BC. pre-3000 BC is not the same as post 3000 BC. for example, before the flood, this is what enki looked like:



after the flood this is what enki looked like

Blah, blah, blah. Women could own land and slaves in Sumer. Women could be Pharaoh in Egypt.

you're skipping whole sections of my post so your comment here is not useful

and here's what i think he looked like before the paint wore off and the instruments in his hands broke off.

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by vethumanbeing
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

It would make sense that a proof of Yahweh exists/existed to even begin a debate regarding Enlil, Enki and prodgeny. Has anyone proven Yahweh lives now/mope or lived otherwise the debate as I see it is MUTE and masterbratorial.

well if you believe sitchin, the anunnaki have long lives (in the thousands of years) but are not eternal. when they die from old age, their offspring take their place, and all of this is geared around the precession of the equinoxes. for example, he states that we are exiting the age of pisces, which was ruled by christ and entering the age of aquarius, which will be ruled by his anunnaki replacement. i think he's wrong. jesus did not rule this age. if he had, we would all be blissfully aware of it. nothing, short of hard core occult teaching of the enlil variety, could get people all over the world, of different backgrounds, to agree that islam should be allowed to flourish unabated in their countries, at the expense of all their fellow countrymen and women, and even while their women are being raped in the streets. this is nothing short of bizarre and everybody knows it.

What else is there, short of conjecture. We play with our beingness our personal history (God Construct) try to change history and is a deadly serious process; what is the point, is someone writing/WRITHING this down ATS. We are the progenitors of a new world in print/idea/format. A new tapestry.