The Bible Says Satan is Zeus

[Valsaex]

I don't know where else to post this, but for some reason I've never seen anyone talk about and/or address on how in the Christian Bible the New Testament states Satan is the ancient pagan Greek God Zeus.

"Revelation 2:12-13 In Pergamon, where Satan's Throne is"

"The Pergamon Altar is a massive structure originally built in the 2nd century BC in the Ancient Greek City of Pergamon. The temple was dedicated to the greek god Zeus. The Pergamon Altar was shipped out of the Ottoman Empire from the original excavation site by the German archeological team lead by Carl Humann, and reconstructed in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin in the 19th century, where it can be seen alongside other monumental structures such as the Ishtar Gate from Babylon." [4]

[4] Throne of Satan - Pergamon Altar - Former Things - Biblical Archaeology and The Bible

 

[Yanni depp]

Interesting find. I used to think the drawings on eqyptian walls of anubis and hindu manuscripts showing ganesha or quetzalcoatl from the mayans were just imagined out of thin air. These days i believe the ancient people of those times definitely saw something.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Well, that is very debatable.

Pergamum was renowned for its Asclepium to the south of the town, where worshippers would flock for cures.
There was also a large temple to Roma and Augustus built there.
We also find a very prominent Serapeum, with a Christian tradition of clashes between Sarapis worshippers and John here.

The importance of the altar to Zeus is probably out of proportion today, because the Germans went to the trouble of reconstructing the thing. To a first or second century audience, it would not be the most important aspect of the place. There were larger and more important sanctuaries to Zeus at other places, like Olympia or Corinth.

If we are to connect it to a god, Sarapis is a better bet; based on the Christian tradition of clashes. However, I think it refers to Rome though.
Pergamum was given to Rome by its last king to prevent a civil war and in this way, most of Asia Minor came to be ruled by Rome. Pergamum was the economic heart of the area and acted as the seat of Roman power. This is likely what is being referred to, as it fits the representation of other figures in Revelation with Roman features, like the harlot of Babylon sitting on seven hills, etc. It is the cornerstone of Roman rule in the area, so the 'throne of Satan' amongst the seven cities mentioned in the province of Asia.

 

[Waggles]

I don't know where else to post this, but for some reason I've never seen anyone talk about and/or address on how in the Christian Bible the New Testament states Satan is the ancient pagan Greek God Zeus.

That is highly probable. In fact most likely.
Babylon is the product of false religion instituted by Satan in opposition to the knowledge of the
one true God and Creator.
There are many similarities of visions and revelations and the handing down of "mystical" knowledge
from Sumeria and Babylon through to Buddhism and Hinduism and the Inca/Mayan religions.
Jesus called Satan a murder and a liar from the beginning. The father of lies.
Strange that two non-Christian faiths very rich and prevalent these days began with angels appearing
to men in caves, on two occasions, and revealing supposed new revelations.

The Bible refers to the Roman Papacy and Catholicism as Mystery Babylon because of the inclusion of
so much pagan and foreign religious doctrines, rites and teachings are blended together into this worldwide dominant Christian faith; and is not overtly revealed and understood as such by the faithful, nor by world leaders who all come to pay homage to the Popes.

 

[cloudyday2]

Baal Hadad was a storm god
Zeus was a storm god
Yahweh was originally the Hebrew version of Baal Hadad and then later the Hebrews saw "Baal" as a false god leading people astray.

Belial was similar to the Christian Satan for the Essenes. He was an angel leading the people of darkness who had current dominion of Earth while Michael was his rival leading the people of light. Belial might have sounded similar to Baal, so maybe early Christians equated the two?

Here is something on Belial
Belial - Wikipedia

 

[Steve Petersen]

Interesting find. I used to think the drawings on eqyptian walls of anubis and hindu manuscripts showing ganesha or quetzalcoatl from the mayans were just imagined out of thin air. These days i believe the ancient people of those times definitely saw something.

Seeing that hallucinogenics were a part of most religious rituals in ancient times, they were bound to see something.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Baal Hadad was a storm god
Zeus was a storm god
Yahweh was originally the Hebrew version of Baal Hadad and then later the Hebrews saw "Baal" as a false god leading people astray.

Belial was similar to the Christian Satan for the Essenes. He was an angel leading the people of darkness who had current dominion of Earth while Michael was his rival leading the people of light. Belial might have sounded similar to Baal, so maybe early Christians equated the two?

Here is something on Belial
Belial - Wikipedia

Well, you are making many assumptions and leaps here.

Baal is actually just a west Semitic honorific, that in the case of Baal became a deity's name. It means Lord. Baal Hadad was adressed in this manner, but he was often just called Hadad or Rapiu. A 'Baal' was often just a god, so they spoke of baalim or 'baalim' lands, referring to especcially fruitful or well-watered areas. A storm identity requires first an association with a specific Baal.
Baal Hadad was in fact often equated by the Greeks to Zeus though.

YHWH as the Hebrew version of Baal Hadad is nonsense. A better argument can be made perhaps for El, but even this has significant flaws. Fact of the matter is that YHWH first appears amongst the Shasu of YHW in the Sinai, greatly antedating El and other supposed Canaanite or Eblaic derivations. It is also supported by YHWH descending from Seir and other such biblical minutiae.

Belial is merely a Hebrew personification of worthlessness, and was mostly used idiomatically. It was not seen as an entity until Second Temple times and by all accounts, only by certain sects. Certainly not by the Pharisees according to the Talmud, and of course Paul was a Pharisee and supplies our only Christian reference to this term.
Further, it is a possible, but ambigious, supposition that the Qumran sect were Essenes, and what if any influence they had in Christianity is very difficult to quantify, but seems minimal. If they aren't Essenes, then there is no evidence any Essenes saw Belial as a being at all.

 

[cloudyday2]

Well, you are making many assumptions and leaps here.

Baal is actually just a west Semitic honorific, that in the case of Baal became a deity's name. It means Lord. Baal Hadad was adressed in this manner, but he was often just called Hadad or Rapiu. A 'Baal' was often just a god, so they spoke of baalim or 'baalim' lands, referring to especcially fruitful or well-watered areas. A storm identity requires first an association with a specific Baal.
Baal Hadad was in fact often equated by the Greeks to Zeus though.

YHWH as the Hebrew version of Baal Hadad is nonsense. A better argument can be made perhaps for El, but even this has significant flaws. Fact of the matter is that YHWH first appears amongst the Shasu of YHW in the Sinai, greatly antedating El and other supposed Canaanite or Eblaic derivations. It is also supported by YHWH descending from Seir and other such biblical minutiae.

Belial is merely a Hebrew personification of worthlessness, and was mostly used idiomatically. It was not seen as an entity until Second Temple times and by all accounts, only by certain sects. Certainly not by the Pharisees according to the Talmud, and of course Paul was a Pharisee and supplies our only Christian reference to this term.
Further, it is a possible, but ambigious, supposition that the Qumran sect were Essenes, and what if any influence they had in Christianity is very difficult to quantify, but seems minimal. If they aren't Essenes, then there is no evidence any Essenes saw Belial as a being at all.

There are lots of different theories, and the theory I stated is one of them that I have read. I believe it came from Daniel Boyarin's book that I recently read. As I recall, Yahweh began as a Hebrew tribal god. Then Yahweh became the Hebrew version of Baal as the Hebrews began to see Him as the leader of pantheon. (Baal Hadad as you probably know inherited leadership from His retiring father El as compensation for His willingness to fight and defeat the chaos goddess of the ocean.) Finally the Hebrews began to see Yahweh as El instead of Baal, and the new nameless "Son of Man" took the role of the young god inheriting dominion from the aging father god.

There are lots of theories, and probably the true origins are very messy due to the complexity of the interacting cultures and their mythologies. So totally dismissing the theory isn't quite fair IMO.

 

[Sanoy]

I like what Quid has to say here in that we should be open minded on how we see this verse.

However I suspect you may be wondering how Christians could relate Satan to Zeus or another pagan god.

Well in ancient Jewish belief and early Christian belief these gods were not vacant. There were real entities behind these names. Part of Christs work was to put an end to their involvement with mankind. In fact part of Christian persecution was in relation to the cessation of these gods. This is the same circumstance which prompted Plutarch to write his "On the failure of Oracles". This is why he have the story of the death of Pan also related by Plutarch. And why PORPHYRY accuses the Christians when he says 'And now they wonder that for so many years the plague has attacked the city, Asclepius and the other gods being no longer resident among us. For since Jesus began to be honoured, no one ever heard of any public assistance from the gods.'. And why Arnobius writes his defense against pagan accusation.

Both the Jews and the Greeks tell us who these "gods" are.
Deuteronomy 32:17 "They sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded."

And Hesiod reports. "First of all the deathless gods who dwell on Olympus made a golden race of mortal men who lived in the time of Cronos when he was reigning in heaven. And they lived like gods without sorrow of heart, remote and free from toil and grief: miserable age rested not on them; but with legs and arms never failing they made merry with feasting beyond the reach of all evils. When they died, it was as though they were overcome with sleep, and they had all good things; for the fruitful earth unforced bare them fruit abundantly and without stint. They dwelt in ease and peace upon their lands with many good things, rich in flocks and loved by the blessed gods. But after earth had covered this generation -- they are called pure spirits dwelling on the earth, and are kindly, delivering from harm, and guardians of mortal men; for they roam everywhere over the earth, clothed in mist and keep watch on judgements and cruel deeds, givers of wealth; for this royal right also they received;” (Hesiod, works and days)

They are one and the same with the Nephilim and the Rephaim. They call themselves gods and allow themselves to be treated as such but they are incomparable to Christ.

“THESE then, being certain daemons who dwell about the earth and underground, and haunt the heavy and cloudy atmosphere over the earth, and have been condemned, for causes which we shall afterwards allege, to inhabit this dark and earthly abode, love to dwell in graves and monuments of the dead and in all loathsome and impure matter, and delight in bloodshed and gore and the bodies of animals of all kinds, and in the exhalation from the fumes of incense and of vapours rising out of the earth. These and their rulers, who are certain powers of the air, or of the nether world, having observed that the human race was grovelling low about the deification of dead men, and spending its labour very zealously upon sacrifices and savours which were to them most grateful, were ready at hand as supporters and helpers of this delusion; and gloating over the miseries of mankind, they easily deceived silly souls by certain movements of the carved images, which had been consecrated by them of old in honour of the departed, and by the illusions produced by oracles, and by the cures of bodies, which these same daemons were secretly ravaging by their own operation, and then again releasing the men and letting them go free from suffering.
Hereby they the more drove the superstitious headlong into supposing sometimes that they were heavenly powers and certain real gods, and at other times that they were the souls of the deified heroes.
From this cause the belief in the polytheistic error began now to be regarded by the multitude as something greater and more venerable, as their thought passed from what was visible to the invisible nature of those who were hidden in the statues, and so confirmed the delusion more strongly.” (Praeparatio Evangelica chapter 2)

 

[Yanni depp]

Seeing that hallucinogenics were a part of most religious rituals in ancient times, they were bound to see something.

Oh yeah, a possibility for sure. I tend to lean toward the sons of God in gen 6:4 being the fallen angels and being the source of all the demigods.

 

[cloudyday2]

I like what Quid has to say here in that we should be open minded on how we see this verse.

However I suspect you may be wondering how Christians could relate Satan to Zeus or another pagan god.

Well in ancient Jewish belief and early Christian belief these gods were not vacant. There were real entities behind these names. Part of Christs work was to put an end to their involvement with mankind. In fact part of Christian persecution was in relation to the cessation of these gods. This is the same circumstance which prompted Plutarch to write his "On the failure of Oracles". This is why he have the story of the death of Pan also related by Plutarch. And why PORPHYRY accuses the Christians when he says 'And now they wonder that for so many years the plague has attacked the city, Asclepius and the other gods being no longer resident among us. For since Jesus began to be honoured, no one ever heard of any public assistance from the gods.'. And why Arnobius writes his defense against pagan accusation.

Both the Jews and the Greeks tell us who these "gods" are.
Deuteronomy 32:17 "They sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded."

And Hesiod reports. "First of all the deathless gods who dwell on Olympus made a golden race of mortal men who lived in the time of Cronos when he was reigning in heaven. And they lived like gods without sorrow of heart, remote and free from toil and grief: miserable age rested not on them; but with legs and arms never failing they made merry with feasting beyond the reach of all evils. When they died, it was as though they were overcome with sleep, and they had all good things; for the fruitful earth unforced bare them fruit abundantly and without stint. They dwelt in ease and peace upon their lands with many good things, rich in flocks and loved by the blessed gods. But after earth had covered this generation -- they are called pure spirits dwelling on the earth, and are kindly, delivering from harm, and guardians of mortal men; for they roam everywhere over the earth, clothed in mist and keep watch on judgements and cruel deeds, givers of wealth; for this royal right also they received;” (Hesiod, works and days)

They are one and the same with the Nephilim and the Rephaim. They call themselves gods and allow themselves to be treated as such but they are incomparable to Christ.

“THESE then, being certain daemons who dwell about the earth and underground, and haunt the heavy and cloudy atmosphere over the earth, and have been condemned, for causes which we shall afterwards allege, to inhabit this dark and earthly abode, love to dwell in graves and monuments of the dead and in all loathsome and impure matter, and delight in bloodshed and gore and the bodies of animals of all kinds, and in the exhalation from the fumes of incense and of vapours rising out of the earth. These and their rulers, who are certain powers of the air, or of the nether world, having observed that the human race was grovelling low about the deification of dead men, and spending its labour very zealously upon sacrifices and savours which were to them most grateful, were ready at hand as supporters and helpers of this delusion; and gloating over the miseries of mankind, they easily deceived silly souls by certain movements of the carved images, which had been consecrated by them of old in honour of the departed, and by the illusions produced by oracles, and by the cures of bodies, which these same daemons were secretly ravaging by their own operation, and then again releasing the men and letting them go free from suffering.
Hereby they the more drove the superstitious headlong into supposing sometimes that they were heavenly powers and certain real gods, and at other times that they were the souls of the deified heroes.
From this cause the belief in the polytheistic error began now to be regarded by the multitude as something greater and more venerable, as their thought passed from what was visible to the invisible nature of those who were hidden in the statues, and so confirmed the delusion more strongly.” (Praeparatio Evangelica chapter 2)

Some Christians and Jews before them saw the polytheistic gods as demons, but there is also the Christian strategy of "baptizing" the pagan traditions. For example, the Virgin Mary seems to have absorbed various fertility goddesses. It seems to me that this strategy would not have been popular among Christians if they believed that the pagan gods were anything more than superstitions. "Baptizing" demonically inspired traditions seems a little unhealthy IMO. That's why I suspect that any Christians sanctioning these "baptisms" must not have seen demons behind them.

 

[Sanoy]

Some Christians and Jews before them saw the polytheistic gods as demons, but there is also the Christian strategy of "baptizing" the pagan traditions. For example, the Virgin Mary seems to have absorbed various fertility goddesses. It seems to me that this strategy would not have been popular among Christians if they believed that the pagan gods were anything more than superstitions. "Baptizing" demonically inspired traditions seems a little unhealthy IMO. That's why I suspect that any Christians sanctioning these "baptisms" must not have seen demons behind them.

Your instinct is right. They wouldn't, I hope, unless they thought them superstition. Beliefs and interpretation changed over the centuries and that unfortunately allowed this sort of thing to happen.

 

[Eyes wide Open]

I don't know where else to post this, but for some reason I've never seen anyone talk about and/or address on how in the Christian Bible the New Testament states Satan is the ancient pagan Greek God Zeus.

"Revelation 2:12-13 In Pergamon, where Satan's Throne is"

"The Pergamon Altar is a massive structure originally built in the 2nd century BC in the Ancient Greek City of Pergamon. The temple was dedicated to the greek god Zeus. The Pergamon Altar was shipped out of the Ottoman Empire from the original excavation site by the German archeological team lead by Carl Humann, and reconstructed in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin in the 19th century, where it can be seen alongside other monumental structures such as the Ishtar Gate from Babylon." [4]

[4] Throne of Satan - Pergamon Altar - Former Things - Biblical Archaeology and The Bible

IMO Satan is a descriptive word to be applied to aspects of our lives that create a disconnective element. If I said sleep deprivation was satan that would be an example. So presumably if what you say is correct then the worship of Zeus was seen as a disconnective element to ones life (satan) not that Zeus was satan.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I don't know where else to post this, but for some reason I've never seen anyone talk about and/or address on how in the Christian Bible the New Testament states Satan is the ancient pagan Greek God Zeus.

"Revelation 2:12-13 In Pergamon, where Satan's Throne is"

"The Pergamon Altar is a massive structure originally built in the 2nd century BC in the Ancient Greek City of Pergamon. The temple was dedicated to the greek god Zeus. The Pergamon Altar was shipped out of the Ottoman Empire from the original excavation site by the German archeological team lead by Carl Humann, and reconstructed in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin in the 19th century, where it can be seen alongside other monumental structures such as the Ishtar Gate from Babylon." [4]

[4] Throne of Satan - Pergamon Altar - Former Things - Biblical Archaeology and The Bible

Well, no, it doesn't mean that Satan is Zeus.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

There are lots of different theories, and the theory I stated is one of them that I have read. I believe it came from Daniel Boyarin's book that I recently read. As I recall, Yahweh began as a Hebrew tribal god. Then Yahweh became the Hebrew version of Baal as the Hebrews began to see Him as the leader of pantheon. (Baal Hadad as you probably know inherited leadership from His retiring father El as compensation for His willingness to fight and defeat the chaos goddess of the ocean.) Finally the Hebrews began to see Yahweh as El instead of Baal, and the new nameless "Son of Man" took the role of the young god inheriting dominion from the aging father god.

There are lots of theories, and probably the true origins are very messy due to the complexity of the interacting cultures and their mythologies. So totally dismissing the theory isn't quite fair IMO.

What people often forget, is that Akkadian or Babylonian beliefs aren't really as close to Hebrew or Canaanite ones, as many people are led to believe. A good way to get some perspective, is to think of the Indo-European cultures as a counterpoint to the Afro-Asiatic (old Hamito-Semitic).

Both Germanic and Greek languages are Indo-European of different branches, of which the North Germanic of the first gave us Norse mythology. They are therefore in a similar position vis-a-vis one another, as the West Semitic Hebrew is to East Semitic Akkadian.
Now if we juxtapose Norse and Greek mythology, a lot will line up. We have two races of gods (Aesir/Vanir and Gods/Titans); thunder gods like Zeus and Thor, a dreary underworld and revered place for heroes (Valhalla/Elysian fields), etc.
The differences are also very clear and definite: Odin is not a thunder god and very different from Zeus, yet still Father of the Gods; the relations between gods differ, with the titans overthrown and the Vanir being essentially in alliance or treaty position, etc.

So this tendency to read Akkadian texts and then import their ideas into a supposed pre-biblical or "unwritten folk religion" or that they were pruned out or such, amongst the Hebrews, needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. Even closely related cultural groups can have radically different ideas, and these groups are related, but more like cousins than brothers. The documentary evidence is simply too slim, so these ideas are very much conjecture, and in the origin of YHWH, they are seeking to explain something which has virtually no extra-biblical sources for the period. The Bible doesn't support such an idea, for its strongest support would be Daniel, which is too late of a text for the idea of 'origins' to be feasible, and tainted as to the originality of its Babylonian elements by the captivity. Our textually oldest Biblical references like the Song of Deborah or Song of the Sea, seem to suggest an association with Seir and the South, which fits the Exodus narrative, early references of YHWH amongst Shasu by Egyptian sources and these contradict readings deriving YHWH from El's titles and Eblaic theophoric names, by their sheer earlier dates hundreds of years before such are first found in the record. So while not impossible, its support is slim and highly suppositional and in the teeth of good counter-evidence. So to dismiss it completely is perhaps a bit too definite for such times, true, but the chances of such a derivation remain slim to infinitesimal.

 

[cloudyday2]

What people often forget, is that Akkadian or Babylonian beliefs aren't really as close to Hebrew or Canaanite ones, as many people are led to believe. A good way to get some perspective, is to think of the Indo-European cultures as a counterpoint to the Afro-Asiatic (old Hamito-Semitic).

Both Germanic and Greek languages are Indo-European of different branches, of which the North Germanic of the first gave us Norse mythology. They are therefore in a similar position vis-a-vis one another, as the West Semitic Hebrew is to East Semitic Akkadian.
Now if we juxtapose Norse and Greek mythology, a lot will line up. We have two races of gods (Aesir/Vanir and Gods/Titans); thunder gods like Zeus and Thor, a dreary underworld and revered place for heroes (Valhalla/Elysian fields), etc.
The differences are also very clear and definite: Odin is not a thunder god and very different from Zeus, yet still Father of the Gods; the relations between gods differ, with the titans overthrown and the Vanir being essentially in alliance or treaty position, etc.

So this tendency to read Akkadian texts and then import their ideas into a supposed pre-biblical or "unwritten folk religion" or that they were pruned out or such, amongst the Hebrews, needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. Even closely related cultural groups can have radically different ideas, and these groups are related, but more like cousins than brothers. The documentary evidence is simply too slim, so these ideas are very much conjecture, and in the origin of YHWH, they are seeking to explain something which has virtually no extra-biblical sources for the period. The Bible doesn't support such an idea, for its strongest support would be Daniel, which is too late of a text for the idea of 'origins' to be feasible, and tainted as to the originality of its Babylonian elements by the captivity. Our textually oldest Biblical references like the Song of Deborah or Song of the Sea, seem to suggest an association with Seir and the South, which fits the Exodus narrative, early references of YHWH amongst Shasu by Egyptian sources and these contradict readings deriving YHWH from El's titles and Eblaic theophoric names, by their sheer earlier dates hundreds of years before such are first found in the record. So while not impossible, its support is slim and highly suppositional and in the teeth of good counter-evidence. So to dismiss it completely is perhaps a bit too definite for such times, true, but the chances of such a derivation remain slim to infinitesimal.

Hmmm. you seem to be suggesting that the origins of Judaism are more connected with Egypt than Canaan? Most information I have seen disagrees, but maybe I misunderstand what you wrote.

Something I thought of yesterday that I bet you might have an opinion on: In the bronze age there was a lot of cultural exchange between kingdoms throughout the Near East and Mediterranean. I suspect that the commonalities in mythologies might originate with this period. I believe the Greeks had a tree of life guarded by a serpent. Of course the Hebrews had this idea also and probably brought it back from their exile in Babylon. Either the myth was inherited by both the Greeks and the Babylonians by a shared ancestral culture or the myth was picked-up as a good story by many cultures during the bronze age interactions? I think the myths resulted from sharing rather than inheritance. That's my idea, and I wonder what you think. (The tree of life is just one example. I believer there are many more.)

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Hmmm. you seem to be suggesting that the origins of Judaism are more connected with Egypt than Canaan? Most information I have seen disagrees, but maybe I misunderstand what you wrote.

Something I thought of yesterday that I bet you might have an opinion on: In the bronze age there was a lot of cultural exchange between kingdoms throughout the Near East and Mediterranean. I suspect that the commonalities in mythologies might originate with this period. I believe the Greeks had a tree of life guarded by a serpent. Of course the Hebrews had this idea also and probably brought it back from their exile in Babylon. Either the myth was inherited by both the Greeks and the Babylonians by a shared ancestral culture or the myth was picked-up as a good story by many cultures during the bronze age interactions? I think the myths resulted from sharing rather than inheritance. That's my idea, and I wonder what you think. (The tree of life is just one example. I believer there are many more.)

You misconstrue. Obviously Canaanite culture was closely intertwined with Israelite, but Akkadian, Eblite, Ugaritic, etc. are not Canaanite, but related other groupings of Semitic peoples. So to take what was written on Baal Hadad by the northwest Semitic peoples or Marduk in Babylonia and then try and apply this to Israelite culture, is very much highly debatable. This would be the equivalent of reconstructing myths of Dionysius from what was written on Balder, and would give you completely incorrect information in that case, so why expect it to be so highly accurate here? Especially when it is so at odds with their own internal texts.

The Greeks had a legend of the Garden of the Hesperides guarded by the Serpent Ladon. Within the garden grew golden apples granting immortality or somesuch, depending on the version. The apple that Eris used to start the squabbling that would lead to the Trojan war, to be given to 'the fairest' goddess, was brought from here. Generally such apples were stolen from the garden, such as when Herakles tricked Atlas into fetching them for him.
There are others as well. There is a superficial similarity between Melqart and Herakles; Utnapishtim, Noah and Deucalion; if I can think of others.

What you should remember, is that the Minoan culture was far reaching. We find Minoan pottery in Egypt and throughout the Levant. When they had fallen, the indisputably Greek Mycenaean largely took their place. When the Bronze Age collapse took place, it took centuries for Greece to recover before our first works like Homer or Hesiod were written, so any such adoptions had to have taken place in the late Bronze age. We also know that some of the Sea People, such as the Peleset (probably the Philistines) were of Aegean stock that marauded and settled then. Such cross-cultural adoptions aren't impossible. We have later examples such as the adoption of Greek aspects of Herakles and Pan into the developing god Krishna in India.

Again though, you must be careful. Indo-European religion has its own Tree/Serpent legends. For instance, Norse Mythology has the serpent Nidhogg eating the roots of Yggdrassil, the world tree; or Indo-Iranian accounts of a tree dripping with Soma, the drink of the gods, with an evil lizard in its roots; and the afore-mentioned Garden of the Hesperides. Such different and widely scattered groups suggest a common origin in Proto-Indo-European religion, not borrowings at a later date. Similarly there are Deucalion's flood, the Semitic accounts, Matsya's Indian flood, etc. Whether these elements are Indo-European, Semitic or predating them both to some assumed even older culture from which both descended, is anyone's guess.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Abraham was from Ur in Mesopotamia. Perhaps he brought their stories in modified form to his descendants.

 

[danny ski]

Abraham was from Ur in Mesopotamia. Perhaps he brought their stories in modified form to his descendants.

I don't think Satan has anything to do with Abraham, nor Moses. I think it was a gradual evolution from Gd"s servant to Gd's enemy after the Babylonian exile and certainly through the Hellenistic period. Ultimately, it was rejected in Judaism and peristed in Christianity.

 

[Sunshine77]

He is not...in fact I’ve always known for him to be much similar to god. Here’s a link if u want to know more.

Zeus vs. God

I don't know where else to post this, but for some reason I've never seen anyone talk about and/or address on how in the Christian Bible the New Testament states Satan is the ancient pagan Greek God Zeus.

"Revelation 2:12-13 In Pergamon, where Satan's Throne is"

"The Pergamon Altar is a massive structure originally built in the 2nd century BC in the Ancient Greek City of Pergamon. The temple was dedicated to the greek god Zeus. The Pergamon Altar was shipped out of the Ottoman Empire from the original excavation site by the German archeological team lead by Carl Humann, and reconstructed in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin in the 19th century, where it can be seen alongside other monumental structures such as the Ishtar Gate from Babylon." [4]

[4] Throne of Satan - Pergamon Altar - Former Things - Biblical Archaeology and The Bible