Date: 2/1/2004 2:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 28989
Enki is the son of Nammu , the primeval sea. Contrary to the translation of his name, Enki is not the lord of the earth, but of the abzu (the watery abyss and also semen) and of wisdom. This contradiction leads Kramer and Maier to postulate that he was once known as En-kur, lord of the underworld, which either contained or was contained in the Abzu. He did struggle with Kur as mentioned in the prelude to "Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and the Underworld", and presumably was victorious and thereby able to claim the title "Lord of Kur" (the realm). He is a god of water, creation, and fertility. He also holds dominion over the land. He is the keeper of the me, the divine laws. (Kramer & Maier Myths of Enki 1989: pp. 2-3) "Gilgamesh, Enkidu, and the Underworld"|
Enki sails for the Kur, presumably to rescue Ereshkigal after she was given over to Kur. He is assailed by creatures with stones. These creatures may have been an extension of Kur itself. (Wolkstein and Kramer p. 4; Kramer 1961 p. 37-38, 78-79).
I don't think he was the Hebrew God, but I'm not sure he was the serpent either, since he was not lord over the Earth, as Satan (the serpent) was supposed to be. Enki was the son of Nammu, while the Hebrew God is considered the God of all and the son to no one. Also, Enki is the lord of wisdom, and Satan is not (unless you somehow connect the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge with wisdom, but knowledge and wisdom are two different things). Then again, I'm not sure that the serpent is supposed to be Satan, since the concept of the devil (an evil "god" was introduced into the Bible later by the Zoroastrians, when they influenced the Jews in Babylon. I'm not sure if I got all my facts right, but my conclusion is that Enki is a god separate from the Hebrew God and the serpent.
|Date: 2/1/2004 2:47:00 PM From Authorid: 28989 Sorry, the first part of my reply above is copied from a Website about Sumerian mythology. My own reply comes after the Kramer page numbers. I forgot to put quotation marks around the copied part. After re-reading the copied paragraph, I realize that Enki is also considered the lord of creation, water, semen, fertility, and he is the keeper of the divine laws. I can see similarities with the Hebrew God, but also differences, like in the fact that someone else gave birth to him, so I'm not sure how he relates to the biblical accounts.|
|Date: 2/1/2004 9:47:00 PM ( From Author ) From Authorid: 11528 Thanks Canoe, that was interesting and I appreciate Your time searching. I will give it a few days before I put up my thoughts about Enki.|
|Date: 2/4/2004 5:15:00 PM ( From Author ) From Authorid: 11528 C'mon people. Someone must have an opinion or a guess at least. I'll be back by then and will share my thoughts with You. Bye for now. Enki|
|Date: 2/6/2004 9:45:00 AM From Authorid: 51173 "The host of the program would toss out some facts,like how the Statue of Liberty was actually a statue of Isis, which is quite right, but then he would mix into his facts a whole lot of disinformation. I was quite surprised by this. " ------------ As you should be, as the Statue of Liberty was modeled after Marie Bartholdi, the sculptor's mother.|
Date: 2/6/2004 10:41:00 AM
From Authorid: 51173
"Its quite obvious that the Genesis book of the bible is loosely based on the oral traditions which came from the Sumerians." ------------------------ Is the claim that the creation account of Genesis was borrowed from the Babylonian creation account, Enuma Elish (hereafter EE; those who hold this view are hereafter "EE proponents" or the Sumerian account (hereafter "Sum" STILL making the rounds? We would expect some similiarities in Sumerian, EE and Genesis -- and in other creation accounts as well -- if they all derived from a common source, and in this case a careful examination of the text reveals that IF any borrowing did occur - which is doubtful - it was the Sumerians and Babylonians who borrowed from Genesis. The present consensus regards the Genesis and Sum as rooted in a common source (as is the Creation account and its Babylonian counterpart) with the Sumerian version showing signs of being less "original" (for example, the bringing aboard of craftsmen and of treasure). Moreover, one of the standards that Historians use to prove borrowing is finding something from the source in the borrowed passage that makes no historical or theological sense in the religion or culture who did the stealing. Examine the role of Ea in the creation myth and you see that the serpent and Ea do not serve the same theological function, thus no borrowing by the Jews from the Sumerians. Both Genesis and EE also supposes a watery chaos in place. The Hebrew word for "deep" here is tehowm, and EE proponents suppose the similarity of this word to the name of the Babylonia goddess Tiamat. In EE, Tiamat was the water-goddess who was slain by Marduk and used to make the watery chaos. It was supposed that tehom was linguistically derived from Tiamat, thus proving borrowing.|
Substantial differences render this unlikely. Tiamat was only one of two water-deities involved in this story; the other was the water-god Apsu. Tiamat was salty water; Apsu was fresh water. Apsu, at any rate, has no parallel in Genesis at all, and the tehom is inanimate.
Of more import, the linguistic connection supposed by the critics could, if anything, only have gone in the opposite direction. The words are indeed from the same root (as are the German word for "blessed" (selig) and the English word "silly"!), but for tehowm to be derived from Tiamat is "grammatically impossible" based on the rules of Hebrew as we know them. The Hebrew tehowm has a masculine ending; Tiamat is feminine. A loan word from Babylonian to Hebrew would retain the feminine; we would not expect tehowm but tiama or teama. Hebrew would also not add the H unless it were found in the original word (i.e., it would have to have been Tihamat). The conclusion is that the two words probably go back to "a common Semitic form," rather than that one was derived from the other.
If Genesis was an effort to "clean up" the Babylonian myth for Hebrews, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to use a word with such a clear linguistic connection to the name of a Babylonian goddess. Genesis could simply have referred to the "waters" as it does later on. Such a "borrowing" would have made no theological sense to Jews.
It is also worth mentioning a special connection that was made by EE proponents who suggested that the EE represented a symbolic form of the rainy season and flood cycle and Babylon, and that this was proof of borrowing by the Hebrews, because they kept this form in spite of living in arid Judea. EE proponents hadn't studied Babylonian climate very well -- the rainy season and the flood season there come at entirely different times of the year; if indeed there is a "rainy season" as the area gets only about 6 inches of precipitation a year.
|Date: 2/20/2004 7:27:00 AM ( From Author ) From Authorid: 11528 Ummmmm, Papa Bryant. Nice job searching out some other persons answer to a difficult question. The only problem is this. The Sumerian texts were written long before Abraham was even born or the Hebrew peoples who wrote the Bible. If anyone based thier story on an older tradition it was the Hebrews. Doesnt one of the commandments state "Thou shalt not bear false witness".|
|Date: 2/20/2004 7:34:00 AM ( From Author ) From Authorid: 11528 papa, Ive never heard that the stautue of liberty was modelled after the sculptors mother but it was originally destined for Egypt and was to represent the Goddess Isis. Egypt refused the statue and it was given to the USA with a fw modifications. One modification was the removal of a chalice and replacing it with a torch.|
|Date: 2/24/2004 6:59:00 PM From Authorid: 51173 Enki, did you even read my reply? Understand this, please... The story of Noah bears all the signs of being the older account, as it is 1.) more sophisticated in its construction than EE; 2.) does bear all the correct theological and historical abstracts relevant to Jewish culture, while EE has elements that are NOT relevant to Sumeria (meaning they left it in when they copied it, even though it made no sense to their religion or way of life). It IS relevant that we have an older autograph of EE than Genesis, but not for the reason of dating the story earlier than Genesis, since the Jews were in the habit of burning Torah scrolls that became worn out with age. You are argueing that EE is older than Abraham from an arguement of silence, which is invalid from the get go.|
|Date: 3/10/2004 10:52:00 PM From Authorid: 14226 I have a very brief understanding of the ancient sumerians. Just from study in highscool. I believe that alot of the christian stories are taken from Ancient mesopatamia (as well as Egypt and Greece). The biggest example being The sumerian story "the Epic of Gilgamesh", the story of the flood. But I do not believe Enki is the christian satan. love lots|
|Date: 3/14/2004 8:43:00 PM From Authorid: 15675 Lol Im slow to this post aren't I? Anyways I wont lie I havent study the Bible so I cant say if the Bible thinks of Enki as the devil but I do not. Im with Canoe here. Poor Sumerians/Babylonians they were once a great civilization and now a days people can barely tell Ishtar and Inanna apart let alone what the proper myths were or anything :S. Im a huge Near Eastern (babylonia, summer, so forth) believer and those are the main deities I as a Wiccan choose to worship. I may not *personally* believe in the Christian devil but I dont think Enki was meant to be him and I respect all religions but I get a bit angered when Satanists claim him to be just that. Lol the even more confusing part is one told me that they dont worship the Christian devil but Enki who is believed to be the devil (maybe it has something to do with anti Christian either way it confuses the heck outta me!) Either way I think Enki was just that the god of Wisdom to the Babylonians (or was it Summerians? See I have no clue because they get mixed so much!) and not the Christian devil and not 'Satan'.|
Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization