Understanding God's origins: Ugaritic Texts

[Calminian]

Ted, I would propose we start a new thread and discuss these things. I don't want to completely squash the OP by a back and forth between me and you about the merits of the tablet theory. If you're game, I'll start a thread when i have time and try to give you the basics of the tablet or similar theories. Feel free to start one yourself as well.

 

[Crunchtime89]

BTW, Adam wasn't there to witness the six days of creation so it must be assumed that he got that information from God. Why would it then be considered that Moses wouldn't have gotten that same information from God himself. Up to the days of Moses we have no Scriptural evidence that the things of God were written down and from what I glean from Moses' dealings with the Hebrews, by the time of his arrival to lead the people out of Egypt, and even into the days they wandered in the desert, they don't seem to have had a very clear understanding or faith in their leader, God.

I agree with this. This seems very feasible and logical.

@Everyone

Thank you for helping me understand all of this better. So let me get this straight here. Sumerians were there before or after the flood? The Bible speaks of the Babylonians and Nimrod, which of course is in fact the Sumerians, however, it's more so the later developed Sumerians. Mankind's history shows Sumer as the first to develop a language, civilization, and "religious" system of having a pantheon. Nimrod was AFTER the flood, so this means, somehow, Noah was one of his ancestors. Then later on, Ham's descendants, the Canaanites, spur off of the Babylonians and adopt their language/culture/etc.... Babylon already hates God because they want to destroy him for sending the flood. The Canaanites learn from the Babylonians and "twist" their own version of "God". Thus, the Ugaritic texts were made.

Thank God that "el" "elyon" "yahweh" "shaddai" "baal" are just terms. Like our "God" in the English language. Here i was thinking they were personal names like "Chris" or "John". So basically, they are adjectives to describe him (almighty, most high, powerful, etc..) You guys could have just put it that way lol

If Adam wrote everything down, it would not be surprising to find alternate versions of history that were not as accurate circulating among various distant peoples through time.

I was having a hard time believing this because there was/is no evidence or physical proof of that. But who knows, it could have been lost (or still is under the water after the flood), or destroyed by other civilizations so they could distort the truth. Or it's possible that the Babylonians/Canaanites have distorted what fragments were left from Adam after the flood? Who knows.

I think I understand your dilemma, so let me propose another example. Let's say Jesus walks the earth doing good, inspires the new testament, and then ascends to heaven. A thousand years later, there are people in Europe murdering others in the name of Jesus, and giving him a bad reputation. When Jesus returns, what is he to call himself? Something other than "Jesus" because some folks have sullied his name?

Well this makes sense because Jesus left this Earth 2013 years ago and here we are with insane theories like the "Holy Grail" along with Mary Magdalene being his wife/mistress. We're trying to analyze the truth of something 6000 years ago when the truth of Jesus is trying to be destroyed as it is right now. And that was only 2 milleniums ago. There are also theories (proposed by Da Vinci, who's a God hater/blasphemer and esoteric occultist) stating there's a Jesus bloodline and family still alive today. Remember the Merovingians in the past? They really thought they were Da Vinci's prophecy in action. We all know the aristocratic Jews have been trying to pollute Jesus' divinity and name since he was alive. The Talmud speaks disrespectfully about Jesus. To the point it angers me.

Thanks guys. Let's not stop here, I love learning about history that disproves other texts or strengthens our understanding of the Bible. Though, I still have questions on Sumer that need to be answered.

 

[Calminian]

...I was having a hard time believing this because there was/is no evidence or physical proof of that. But who knows, it could have been lost (or still is under the water after the flood), or destroyed by other civilizations so they could distort the truth. Or it's possible that the Babylonians/Canaanites have distorted what fragments were left from Adam after the flood? Who knows.

Well, there may be more evidence than you think. We don't have Adam's and Noah's and Shem's tablets (or parchments or whatever medium they used), but we do have archeological evidence that gives us insights into the structural nature of Genesis. Here are some resources if you're interested. The last one is actually Wiseman's book who really gets credit for the primary theory.

The Tablet Theory of Genesis Authorship
True Origin
Curt Sewell © 1998-2001 by Curt Sewell

CreationWiki: Tablet theory

Did Moses Write Genesis?
Answers in Genesis
by Dr. Terry Mortenson and Bodie Hodge AiG–U.S. June 28, 2011

Who Wrote Genesis? Are the Toledoth Colophons?
Creation Ministries International
by Charles V Taylor, M.A., Ph.D., PGCE, LRAM, FIL, Cert. Theol.

The First Book of Moses and The 'Toledoth' of Genesis
By Damien F. Mackey

Tracing the Hand of Moses in Genesis
By Damien F. Mackeys

Who Wrote Genesis?
Excerpts from Henry M. Morris, the Genesis Record, pp. 25-30

Who Wrote Genesis?
A Third Theory
by Paul A. Hughes

New Discoveries in Babylonia About Genesis (pdf)
By Air Commodor E P. J. Wiseman, C.B.E.​

 

[ChetSinger]

Thank you for helping me understand all of this better. So let me get this straight here. Sumerians were there before or after the flood? The Bible speaks of the Babylonians and Nimrod, which of course is in fact the Sumerians, however, it's more so the later developed Sumerians. Mankind's history shows Sumer as the first to develop a language, civilization, and "religious" system of having a pantheon. Nimrod was AFTER the flood, so this means, somehow, Noah was one of his ancestors. Then later on, Ham's descendants, the Canaanites, spur off of the Babylonians and adopt their language/culture/etc.... Babylon already hates God because they want to destroy him for sending the flood. The Canaanites learn from the Babylonians and "twist" their own version of "God". Thus, the Ugaritic texts were made.

Being a literalist, I believe Sumer was post-flood. Interestingly, the first part of the Sumerian King's List and the antediluvian genealogy in Genesis probably refer to the same people. Genesis has 10 names, including Adam and Noah, while the Sumerian list has 8 names but doesn't include the "first man" or "flood hero".

There's more about that here: The antediluvian patriarchs and the Sumerian King List

Thank God that "el" "elyon" "yahweh" "shaddai" "baal" are just terms. Like our "God" in the English language. Here i was thinking they were personal names like "Chris" or "John". So basically, they are adjectives to describe him (almighty, most high, powerful, etc..) You guys could have just put it that way lol

They're all titles except YHWH, which is a name meaning something like "I am". It's an unusual kind of name, more like a statement of existence than a description of anything.

Btw, if others say they've found YHWH elsewhere, maybe they have and maybe they haven't. Deities named YW and YH have been found, for example, and but there isn't a wide consensus that either is YHWH.

And there's a big disagreement whether YHWH was actually used during the time of the patriarchs or came along later. You'll find all kinds of opinions on that, even among Christians.

I'm happy to help any way I can. I myself was once bothered that Judaism wasn't "original", until it dawned on me that the flood survivors were righteous people who knew God and surely some of their knowledge would be retained, even in clouded or piecemeal form.

There's even a Biblical explanation why those early cultures tended to be polytheistic: because exposure to multiple divine beings truly was the human experience back then, and with God's blessing, no less. But I suppose that's a different thread.

 

[Crunchtime89]

I'm happy to help any way I can. I myself was once bothered that Judaism wasn't "original", until it dawned on me that the flood survivors were righteous people who knew God and surely some of their knowledge would be retained, even in clouded or piecemeal form.

There's even a Biblical explanation why those early cultures tended to be polytheistic: because exposure to multiple divine beings truly was the human experience back then, and with God's blessing, no less. But I suppose that's a different thread.

Well let me just say this. You do know that the flood didn't destroy all of the Nephilim/Giants/"Nimrods"/Angel-Human Hybrids/"Sons of God" right? So that makes sense that these early cultures were misled by other deities. Jesus even said, "As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be when I return". Now, we have to understand what was going on in Noah's time. Yes it was sin left and right, but you know, if that were the case, Jesus would have came by now (you and I both know that) considering that sinning and God blaspheming is at an all time high.

Go read Genesis 6:1 and 6:4. THIS is what was going on in Noah's time. THIS is what Jesus was referring to when his return shall come to pass. This is exactly why God sent the flood. Not only because of wickedness and blaspheming of His holy name, but because he had to rid the human bloodline of any traces of sinfulness. He had to "start fresh" for Jesus to be born (the other human half/his mother) pure and perfect. That's why Herod wanted every male Jewish child killed. You see, Satan tried and tried again and again from Genesis up until nearly the latter years of B.C. to stop Jesus from coming. To our advantage and fortune, none of his plans worked out.

Whether you believe it or not, there is a "hybrid" bloodline still alive since the post-flood with Jesus even pointing this out about his future return regarding the same pattern of Noah's days. I'm not too big into conspiracies, but I believe God has showed me how this world works. If you'd like, I can start a WHOLE topic/thread on this. Now I consider this portion my expertise because I've been researching for over 6 years. The research I've compiled, alone, proves that Jesus needs to come back. Don't think I'm a nut, because as you can see, I take a logical approach at everything by research and connecting the dots before I conclude to my decision. (take this thread for example)

So yes, with that being said, I could see why and how these other cultures have distorted "God"s truth. The Nephilim's (sons of god/fallen angels) traces hadn't been entirely depleted. These are the entities that these pantheistic/pagan "religions" are centered around. (Aztec Quetzlcoatl/Mayan Kukulkan/Canaanite El/Egyptian Ra/Greek Zeus/Roman Jupiter/Hindi Indra)

You know, you can find similarities in all of these pagan Gods? That's what's crazy about this all. Also, the use of dragons and elephants in Egyptian/Mayan/Aztec/Chinese culture show the relativity among all groups. Yet, they are divided by waters and countless thousands of miles. These ancient cultures never came in contact with each other (example Maya: They had elephants in carvings. The elephant is NOT native to central/south america. It's nativity is Southeastern Asia (Pakistan/India) and Sub-Sahara Africa. Think about that. Same thing with dragons. The Indian/Pakistani/Mayan Zodiacs are unbelievably similar. Yet, no contact in ancient times.

But I'm getting off subject here i'll save that all for another topic.

Yes I believe these deities (fallen angels/hybrids) hated the true God so they taught simple man, after the flood, how to worship them instead of the one true God of the Israelites. Nimrod was in fact a Nephilim product (bible even uses the hebrew "Giant"/the account of Gilgamesh says he was 1/4 Human, 3/4 God. Bible says he was a mighty hunter before the Lord. Gilgamesh says he was hunting after "huwawa" to destroy him for sending the flood.). Just like Goliath who was a Canaanite (that practiced that polytheistic crap). After all, Satan tries to use the same "gameplan" that God uses. He's a knock off "wanna-be" that tries so hard to be like the Almighty.

PS: You know, it just dawned on me. God was furious with the Phillistines and wanted them to be eliminated. These same Phillistines knew who their "El" and "Elyon"s were, and that tells you right there that Jehovah had no association with them. The fact he helped David against those brutes proves he wanted revenge for their misguided/pagan worship of blaspheming him.

 

[Luvtosew]

You can read about it here;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_(deity)


I mean Abraham and his dad Terach came from somewhere.

Says El took Asherat (the sea goddess) for a wife, and then had a son Baal, but then this article says El is Dagon, the fish God so they had more than one God, but ever look at the popes hates , ever think of Jonah and the whale like maybe he was a 1/2 man and 1/2 fish. I've been a Rc for many years, and started reading all this, but I just reconcile it and I just believe in God, like all the ancient people did. I find it fascinating to read this stuff.

 

[Hovind]

From a Christian website: (Google Ugarit and the Bible)

"There is one Ugaritic text which seems to indicate that among the inhabitants of Ugarit, Yahweh was viewed as another son of El. KTU 1.1 IV 14 says:

sm . bny . yw . ilt

“The name of the son of god, Yahweh.”

This text seems to show that Yahweh was known at Ugarit, though not as the Lord but as one of the many sons of El."

From Wiki Yahweh article

"In the earliest stage Yahweh was one of the seventy children of El, each of whom was the patron deity of one of the seventy nations. This is illustrated by the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint texts of Deuteronomy 32:8–9, in which El, as the head of the divine assembly, gives each member of the divine family a nation of his own, "according to the number of the divine sons": Israel is the portion of YHWH."

 

[ChetSinger]

From a Christian website: (Google Ugarit and the Bible)

"There is one Ugaritic text which seems to indicate that among the inhabitants of Ugarit, Yahweh was viewed as another son of El. KTU 1.1 IV 14 says:

sm . bny . yw . ilt

“The name of the son of god, Yahweh.”

This text seems to show that Yahweh was known at Ugarit, though not as the Lord but as one of the many sons of El."

From Wiki Yahweh article

"In the earliest stage Yahweh was one of the seventy children of El, each of whom was the patron deity of one of the seventy nations. This is illustrated by the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint texts of Deuteronomy 32:8–9, in which El, as the head of the divine assembly, gives each member of the divine family a nation of his own, "according to the number of the divine sons": Israel is the portion of YHWH."

Imo, it's understandable that the Ugarits would place YHWH as one of El's sons. If they believed him to be a deity but didn't believe him to be El himself, where else would they place him but as a son of El?

Israel's view was different, though. In Deut 32:8-9, YHWH isn't one of El's sons, but is El himself. How can we deduce this? From the rest of the Hebrew OT, of course.

But there's another reason, obtained by deduction. El had 70 sons, one for each nation. The nations, all 70 of them, are listed in Genesis 10 and Israel isn't numbered among them. Why isn't it there? Because the formation of Israel came later, with the calling of Abraham, that's why.

Israel was the 71st nation. So how could the Israelites consider YHWH, their God, to be one of El's 70 sons if they didn't consider themselves to be one of the 70 nations?

There are more scholarly sources for this stuff than wiki. Here's one: http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32BibSac.pdf