That's a fair question! I'd answer briefly from three perspectives. First, in terms of literary genre, there is a notable difference between the two accounts. Enuma Elish was quite likely written with the intention that it be taken as myth, in the same way that the myths of the Greeks were intended to be so understood. Genesis 1 may indeed have mythical elements to it, but one would have to say that at the very least, it represents a radically 'stripped-down' myth, with a much more simple and elegant literary construction. That doesn't mean it's 'true,' of course, but at least it suggests it's different. Second, historically, Enuma Elish does not purport to set forth a continuity with the drama it describes and actual human history as such. The Genesis text does. Whether one accepts the account of Adam and Eve as actual history, it is clear that the biblical narrative sets forth actual human connections that trace back to those two and their situation in the garden. Again, this does not mean it's 'true,' but it does distinguish the biblical narrative from pure myth. Third, as to its truth, that is of course a very different question. A commitment to the truth of the biblical narrative flows from a conviction that the narrative represents some kind of revelation which is reliable and trustworthy. A skeptic could readily acknowledge the rather striking difference between Enuma Elish and the biblical text, without necessarily concluding the biblical text is 'true.' The truth commitment follows from a broader conviction of faith that touches the entire biblical content. Thanks for a thoughtful question.
If an explorer traveled to a country and encountered an indigenous population. During the time he spent there he had many interactions with the indigenous population. The indigenous people learnt about his ship the crew and many other things about their visitors, until they sailed away. Many years passed and the indigenous population had passed down this encounter to their generations , and in time there were stories written about it some of the story became distorted throughout time and parts remained factual. Many years later in another part of the world the ancestors of the explorers compiled an accurate journal of their forefathers encounters for their future generations. As time passed the discovery of the indigenous account was unearthed, it had striking similarities to the journal but also striking differences. Do we assume the journal was plagiarized from the indigenous account due to the fact that their writings are older? Do we assume that the journal is nothing but a myth do to the findings that was unearthed that are also assumed as myths? Or does the unearthed findings give authenticity to their journal that preceded the unearthed indigenous account?
Dan last I'm pretty sure we start with the first written stories, and firsthand accounts( history) when it comes to importance/truth, then move to the OT. You can from there compare to archaeological discoveries to see which fits better considering real world evidence(again, OT is lacking here, as there is no evidence for the exodus, nor does OT match king lists, other firsthand accounts of the time, or archaeology. That being said, Babylonian accounts are the most plentiful and complete, but are also co-opted like OT ( sumerians were not Semitic, babylonians and akkadians were, at least where majority is concerned.) anything regarding Marduk I personally discount.
I am Hebrew Israelite and we pride ourselves on having a deep understanding of the bible and our ability to use other historical accounts of biblical history to see and understand The books deeper although no other books can be mated with the bible it's good to learned with discernment. I say that to say this man has connected a lot of dots for me and gave.me a thirst to read up on other characters to understand the atmosphere and motivation of our ancestors and how the biblical account of history is woven throughout world history causing all sorts of changes that I see clearly after learn from this man of The Most High ..... thank you sir and keep up the good works!
Great presentation and reconciliation between Genesis and Enuma Elish so that a lay person can understand the reconciliation. Really enjoyed his presentation on Enuma Elish.
This Lectureship is very helpful for my understanding of the historical context of world history laid beside biblical history. Thank you for providing these lectures on TH-cam. Should receive the book this week. Looking forward to it.
So excited to find your channel. I'm a homeschooling mom trying to each my kids the Bible and history in context. We are delving deep into ancient Near Eastern history and there were so many things that confused me - your videos are helping make sense of it. Thanks!
Hi Simone - thanks so much. You may be interested in a structured online course I have developed for home schoolers on this topic. It includes quizzes, essays, collateral readings, etc. If you'd like to take a look, go to my website, www.brucegore.com, and click the online courses tab. Thanks again!
I’m loving the fact that the lessons are not about religion, it’s really about History. How awesome it is to be educated with great information. It sucks that I couldn’t even see and travel these rich in history countries: Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon. Truly, with all these chaos, I now understand why God chose the Israelites to be His people during ancient times. Binge watching all episodes.
What's intriguing to me is how the torah does claim there's water above just like the enuma elish, but only the torah brings the water down during the flood. As far as I know, the biblical texts has no further insistence of water above after that point.
I think this explanation has many truths, but i also think that you kind of missed the main reason why this story is so controversial in the first place, because what it sounds like is that elements of it are BORROWED to serve as a story of creation, while other parts were discarded for who knows why. This part i haven’t found an answer for, and is a little concerning.
One of the Very best Speakers I've ever heard right here, he has the Gift of many ways of bringing comparative relations and similarities to Light in a Total Scholarship breakdown without stepping on the status quo beliefs!!
If Genesis didn't borrow from the Enuma Elish why there are so many similaries in two stories a thousand years apart? The speaker addresses the differences in great detail but not the similarities and where they come from.
I'm thinking since Abraham grew up there he knew the sumerian tales in great detail. Or, there was another source that both took from. It seems to me that the elohim are the same gods the sumerians talked about (the Devine council) psalms 82. Good lecture nonetheless
This shows a common ancestor of the truth given by God. Things survived both the flood and the division of the languages. Both the Sumerians and and Hebrews had common ancestors dating back to the days of the fall
I have spent my life trying to combine religious teachings and what my voices tell me to teach my children the truth. I want to spend the remainder of my life traveling and learning! What type of schooling do I need to fulfill my destiny of complete truth?
View each day as a new day in school, and each experience as a new lesson in the classroom of Christ. Read good books, and let each book you read lead you to the next one. "Complete truth" is a great aim, but an impossible target to hit. Always be more interested in the truth you are pursuing than the truth you believe you are possessing.
There's a lot good here, but I do wish that Mr. Gore had been more up-front initially about his Presbyterian standpoint that Genesis is a divine revelation and (seemingly) that the Enuma Elis is not. I could have intuited this from his bio, but I jumped in and was often surprised by the ethnicentrism in both analysis and editorializing. I thought I was watching a classroom lecture, and was cought off-guard throughout by the clear personal preference being given to Genesis over and above the "bizarre" EE - which is fine as a personal or theological statement, but which would be inappropriate in a college classroom today.
Your outline of Sumerian dieties simplifies the information I have noted. The way your information is presented is going to save me many valuable hours sir. Am a grey-beard now and have started learning just how precious time actually is (here). Am glad to have this information available on the WWW. (Would like to thank Mr. Berner-Lee)
I think they were both right in their own time. We arrived here, built and placed into a system that requires learning. An education system, a both personal and collective system at the same time. Certain truths have been discovered and recorded by many groups, all seeking knowledge. Time tells truth when applied to new ways of thinking. The Bible is understandable then and now, accuracy is pointer of truth. A collection of revelations not possible before Abraham. Many times one string of thought opens the biggest doors. The idea of one God was a revelation that changed the way some viewed our reality, leading to new ideas to build on. Those ideas are as grand now as they were then, volume and virility of growth is a pointer towards truth. Revelations are just one new idea birthed out of little ones before, a collection of thoughts that reveal something that the thoughts by themselves would not reveal. The Bible is recorded revelations of truths within the system that were always there, only now revealed. Abraham, started a growth spurt in knowledge,one that had been built on slowly, built on many smaller thoughts that converged
My son has been listening to you for a while now and loves your lessons. He’s 16 and found your TH-cam videos by searching ‘historical context of the Bible’ 😍😍
I don't have to know everything because I know He's good and I know enough that i trust Him and His Ways!! And its nothing of myself, it is all a gift from Him!! Fascinating to learn of Him though, Thanks for this message!! ❤❤❤
"They thought it was water above the dome" is a literalist interpretation/assumption that the symbol of "The Waters of Chaos" was a literal misunderstanding of physical nature. These waters are symbolic of a greater mystery, not a physical cosmology. If they they thought that water was literally on the other side of the dome, "because it was blue", then where did they say the "water" went at night?
For a responsible treatment of the Mesopotamian cosmology, please see Georges Roux, Ancient Iraq (Penguin History). www.amazon.com/Ancient-Iraq-Third-Penguin-History/dp/014012523X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1547306680&sr=8-1&keywords=roux+ancient+iraq Thanks for your interest.
I have read many theories, some quite fanciful. It has been an intriguing question for centuries, but I claim no special insight nor expertise in the matter. Thanks for your interest.
@@GoreBruce they got them from the oral history of proto-genesis that has been adapted to obscure and replace god with the Pantheon of demons who mimic and twist the God of the bible. Think of a diverging game of telephone that stretches from the Adamic family essentially being corrupted as humanity spread across the Earth and moved away from God.
Bruce, have you read John Lennox's "Seven days that divide the world"? He covers some of the same points. It occurred to me that you might have interacted with each other.
Since this video was made the Gobekli Tepe has been dated to around 8000 B.C. and is currently considered the oldest settlement yet discovered in the world. It certainly is NOT on the scale of Mesopotamia but it was a civilized human settlement. It predates the creation of the universe as calculated by Answers in Genesis. 🤔
@37:42 Why is it that when we discuss old stories like the Enuma Elish that have been "plagiarized" by the bible we need to see "un-literally" and yet, the bible text, (which consists of the same plagiarized content) is to be taken literally?? Isn't that a fallacy?
I'm LCMS and I've often struggled with reconciling the Bible as literal truth with the obvious logical impossibilities of doing so. In general, we allow ourselves only to teach what the biblical text says as free from extra interpretation and commentary as is possible. As you can imagine, teaching theology in a vacuum like that comes with some problems. We're currently struggling with our private schools in how to teach science while sticking to strict literal interpretation - it's not easy. What I want to know is this: Is there anywhere in scripture, of even in the early church fathers that suggests we should take things so literally? I can't help but wonder if literal interpretation is a modern overreaction to secularism.
It seems plain enough that the New Testament does not always take the Old Testament in a 'literal' sense, in the way you are using that term (cf. e.g., Acts 15: 16-18). The difficulty, however, may go a little deeper. The word 'literal' is actually connected to the word 'literature,' as in 'literary genre.' To take the bible 'literally' (in the correct sense of the term) means to respect the type of literature under examination. Thus, the task of understanding the intended sense of the text requires some fair-minded hermeneutics, which is often in short supply in certain circles of biblical interpretation! Thanks for your thoughtful comments!
Quite so! Unfortunately, you'll find widely varying definitions of 'reality' among readers of the Bible, because 'reality' tends to be a function of presuppositions, which by the nature of the case are non-demonstrable (which is why they are presuppositions!). The term 'hermeneutics' itself, however, simply refers to the rules of sensible interpretation, the same rules commonly applied to any piece of literature (or for that matter, to this morning's newspaper).
Depending on what parts of Scripture you refer to, it becomes easier or harder to take it literally. I think we can say that everything in the Bible can be taken as true but not necessarily as factually true. Certainly certain parts are not literal - the government is not literally on Jesus' shoulders. My church's general teaching is that we should take the Bible only as figurative when it seems to clearly be so and never otherwise. I struggle with such a hard-line mindset. The problem, I think, is our incomplete knowledge of the universe and our incomplete comprehension of Scripture. Unfortunately, the Bible is a bit like a cloud - you see what you want to see. I wonder if the answer isn't one or the other but possibly both? Did God create the world in 6 days or the universe in 13 billion years? Can both be true? Is it us that fail to understand how? I have no answers for this. It's a challenge I have faced as both a rational and a conservative Christian. My church is somewhat reactionary on this topic and I want to support them but I have trouble blindly following anything without analyzing it.
BassPlayer60134 watch "Mauro Biglino". He translates the O.T and all mystery disappears. I am sure you can merge some of the "creators" science and maintain your faith.
I’m enjoying your informative videos. Thanks so much for sharing. Ancient Israel and Mesopotamia were a bit distant from one another, so, it’s conceivable the author(s) of Genesis did not read Enuma Elish.
That is a hypothetical possibility, but given the well traveled roadways of the 'fertile crescent' that connected Mesopotamia with Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Egypt, not a probability. Thanks for the feedback.
Abraham came from Ur and it seems inconceivable that he would never have heard of or read the Enuma Elish. There was no "ancient Israel" in existence at that time
@@curtisking5138 Yeah...It's not like ancient Israel never had any visitors from other nations and weren't influenced by other cultures. Genetic studies show that today's various Jewish ethnic groups are mixed. It was even found that they have 3 to 5 percent SubSaharan African ancestry. I am part Ashkenazi Jewish, and so I am interested in Jewish genetics.
@@fomalhauto : The term "Jewish" is nebulous. In one instance it describes the follower of a particular religion, and in another instance it is said to be the descendants of a particular particular person. Sometimes it is an indication of a particular race or a specific ethnicity culture.
Also, the Sumerians knew the earth was round. The were the first to map out the solar system, if you look at ancient tablets you can see small map of the solar system, the sun in the middle and other spheres (planets) around the middle sphere. Im sure you and many others have seen those tablets its not really hidden or anything.
Came back to this lecture tonight. Dang, the Internet is so cool. As I am taking notes keep messing up... US Civil War was my major and had the Potomac River... so Mesopotamia and Potomac keep getting interchanged as I key-in. Another guy I read his studies is a Greek linguist type. Dang Greeks... can't live with it, can't live without it.
But wait, isn't trying to emphasize the differences a bit like trying to show how different Spider-Man is from Batman? I mean, I think Marvel comics writers were completely aware of Batman ( and influenced by him). At the end of the day, people trying to argue that Spider-Man is real should be ridiculed here in the 21st century. Right?
Many men are God in their own mind and proclaim God has no right to destroy that which He created. When the judgment of God comes upon men, the men go insane.
I respect Mr. Gore's intelligence and enjoy his very informative lectures! The Enuma Elish may be " bizarre" but so is a book/ god that took the time to ban eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics but didn't care to condem human slavery, war or keeping the young virgin girls as sex slaves. It's also "bizarre" that: 1. An all powerful God would lie, be jealous and have regrets. 2. A loving God would endorse cultural racism, land theft, misogyny and killing women, babies and animals.
> that took the time to ban eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics but didn't care to condem human slavery, war or keeping the young virgin girls as sex slaves. that was just laws moses set forth in levitcus for their 40 years in the desert. additionally human slavery was the trend durin those times yet moses laws for slavery were very humane compared to others. for exapmle it allowed slaves to be freed. > 1. An all powerful God would lie, be jealous and have regrets. god doesnt lie. that is the trait of lucifer. god can be jealous and repent his creations...so what? its just his character and personality yet his repentence for man was for good and understandable reasons. > 2. A loving God would endorse cultural racism, land theft, misogyny and killing women, babies and animals. "endorse" is a poor word choice and doesnt include the context of why god instructed joshua to take the land of canaan. they sacrificed babies to lucifer amongs other things. you make it seem like god is doing this for fun and his own amusement. he floods his creations, he rains fire and brimstones on his creation, yes, but have u considered why? definitley not for amusiment. your word choice of 'endorse' makes it like he sponsored the event. New International Version 5The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created-and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground-for I regret that I have made them.” 8But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
You made a statement that God doesn't need our worship, but that we need it.....how do you figure we need to worship? Also on several places throughout the bible God does ask of worship.....this comment you made interest me, is it possible to ask you to explain more?
God definitely desires worship. It's true that it's easy to concentrate on history and to ignore God's heart's desire. He definitely wants to be prayed to, and He's definitely a God with intentions toward His creation. It's hard to be someone who understands theology, history and has a practical experience of who God is and what He's trying to do, all at the same time. Most Christians have a loose grasp on all three. I praise the Lord that someone can explain the enūma elis to us in any capacity. Every member functions according to their measure. Some with a hymn, some with a teaching, some with the historical background of the Bible! If you believe you can offer this gentleman some insight into contacting God, do so, but as a brother in the Lord! Jesus is Lord!
I would say the premise of your question is highly doubtful, but either way, the fact that Jesus used the word frequently, and took it from the Old Testament scriptures should be sufficient to resolve the matter.
@@GoreBruce First, thank you for taking the time to respond. I honestly appreciate it. Second, Jesus uses it at the beginning of sentences, and not at the end of a prayer. Every Christian I know uses it after a prayer. So I guess I should rephrase that. Is it normal to use Amen after prayer if Jesus didn't? Also, when I search the etymology of the word "Amen", it seems to point back to the Egyptian deity. If you have a different thought on the etymology I am all ears.
33:30, what you say about earthly kingdoms being backed up by divine powers is definitely true. If we read Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and take the DSS and LXX manuscripts into account (which the ESV and NRSV translations do), it talks about how at Babel, God divided the nations according to the sons of God (b'ne elim). This is appealing to the idea that God disinherited the adamic nations at Babel and handed them over to other lesser members of His Heavenly Host to steward, which ends badly (Ps. 82; cf. Ps. 89:5-7). Would definitely recommend looking into Dr. Michael Heiser's work on the Divine Council and the Deuteronomy 32 worldview.
To Bruce and others in comments, So important when worshipping 'God' to exactly identify who you want to address. "The Father of All Spirits" brings forth Creation and His/Her aspects (polarity of left right brain functions) is made manifest in 'The Son of Man' made as flesh and blood in His image, higher than those Annunakis. The deepest of all questions inside the Creation narrations is which came first (because even in Genesis there is a double narration). The girls by the river that Enki impregnated are the mitochondrial DNA found in Adapa and Timat, they were from whom Abel and Kain were born, Kain having the recessive RH Neg and was different. Why? Because The Son of Man requested a people to flourish on the Earth and sbdue it "in my image". That is the only DNA bloodline that by nature, keeps separated from other Blood types. That last part is an educated guess. They were eye pleasing attractive and comely to the Black-Haired Annunaki. So the Y(male) chromosome is Annunaki and apparently only Noah's descendants survived the deluge. We can tell that after Seth that Methusalah 'walked with God' and as well, Enoch 'taken'. Before the Deluge a very Holy child was birthed from the womb of Sothinim who was an elderly virgin having married Noah's brother, Nir, a Priest.(I am being lazy and recall these names from Enoch 2) This Holy baby was called Melchizedek. He was 'The Son of Man'. How did He get to be the Son of Man when there is just One Son of Man from the beginning of creation of living things? How did Jesus also get to be honored as 'The Son of Man'? One thing that is evident is that the good An els had one up on the bad An els and that is they could minister and help in matters of health, they knew how to clone. They carried the baby Melchizedek to Paradise before the Deluge. We are told 'The Son of Man' is a LINEAGE but not of Carnal Knowledge, no intercourse and birthed via a uterus that could specifically bear such special babies. Peter recognized Jesus as the "Son of Man", to him was given authority to begin to build the perfect Law of Spirituality/Love/Mercy. In the same breath Jesus said that John would still be alive when He returned (as a thief in the night) for the Bride, the persecuted Elect. He also said He would return to that generation who stood before Him. So to anyone who says "Jesus says in Revelations" well that is not the voice of Jesus who loves and weeps for those who stand opposing Him. The Job description of Jesus is Savior, Mentor, Deliverer, Reconciler, Healer etc He does not Curse as that Spirit does to the Churches of Asia Minor. (John followed behind Paul and Peter and stole the Converts of the Covenant of the free to sit back under the Law, so missing out on the Table of Grace. He was very pedantic on the Law. He said a curse on you readers if ... ) Melchizedek is of the original Law of righteousness found in the Golden rule of Love. Through the loins of Abraham (Annunaki hybrid) the Levites bowed to Melchizedek. The Law of 'The Son of Man' is above the law of Moses. Jesus was thus bowed to via the cloned flesh and blood of "Son of Man". What good can come from Jacob who deceived the birthright and stole the blessing. Father of lies. The Bible is about drawing those Anu's Els back to redemption via grace and to also along with them draw back all the Spirits of Men made in the likeness/image of 'The Son of Man'. At least this is the take I get from all the info and the Heart that is drawing all to a finality of the long Ages.
Thank you for this lecture. It made me think about your stance on creation. Starting at 39:05 you speak of two extremes, on the one hand those who claim that Genesis was simply copied from the Enuma Elish, on the other hand those who claim, that everything said in Genesis 1+2 must be completely scientifically accurate. I was wondering what exactly you mean when you say the second one was an error. I have watched many of your church-history lectures and some of your revelation-lectures and that makes it hard and unfair to call you a liberal. But can you give examples of what must not be understood as scientifically accurate? I believe in Genesis' accuracy - I am a young-earth-reformed-baptist creationist.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment and question. I think my point in context was that 'scientific accuracy' has been a moving target for millennia. It meant one thing to the pre-socratics, another to Aristotle, another to Ptolemy, another to Copernicus, still another to Kepler, Newton, not to mention Einstein, etc. We think we moderns have got scientific accuracy figured out, but what will scientific opinion be in 500 to 1000 years from now? Maybe Genesis 1 is 'scientifically accurate,' but by whose standard? Ours? Ptolemy's? For my part, I affirm that Genesis 1 is true, regardless of whether the fluctuating standard of 'scientific accuracy' agrees or not. Hope that is responsive to your question. Thanks again for your interest!
+Benzkopf Hello Brother. It's incredible to me that a young earth creationist could dig so deep in the historical and literary data relating to creation as different peoples understood it while embracing a young earth view. Can you explain your background? As a Christian who espouses the ministry of a young earth creationist, as you would call the person I'm referring to, I'm similarly very open to your view. However, what with the constant bombardment of the billion year theory, it would betray a lot of what I have learned and hold to be true to learn that the earth is no more than a few thousand years old. Still, I will obey the heavenly vision if it is shown to me. Thanks for your time.
Raymond Nolan Scott I like that point. I believe in creation. I also believe the Bible makes it very clear that prior to Adam the creation days were definitely not literal days. There is no doubt the universe is countless eons old. When the Bible says we are created in the image of God, i don’t believe it means God looks like us with legs arms eyes etc. but the image of God to me is his qualities like love and justice. Maybe it’s related to consciousness. So there is no reason to doubt that our genetic code has been around for 10s of thousands of years, but the injection of consciousness could well have occurred 6 thousand years ago. It might explain the sudden change in how Homo sapiens lived, a sudden change from hunter gathers to building cities. Just my thoughts, and I’m a no body lol..
Just to drive my point even further......... "When the sky above was not named, And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name, And the primeval Apsû, who begat them, And chaos, Tiamat, the mother of them both, Their waters were mingled together, And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen; When of the gods none had been called into being." See, Apsu (Abzu in English), is primeval.....Primeval definition is "From the earliest time in history". The universe existed since the beginning of time.
Apsu is a Sumerian word, it means Cosmic Waters. Its not a location, i believe its just the universe as a whole. Sumerians had no terms to describe the cosmos. They might have known that you float in space, and to them, it might seem similar to floating in water so they described the universe as water. Thats what i think. Without reading more Sumerian documents its hard to say what they meant by "Cosmic Waters".
+Bruce Gore i'd like to read more Sumerian documents, do you know where i can find more? I am Assyrian, you might have heard of us. They are our ancestors, some of us still know cuneiform, but most of us dont unfortunately. Im VERY interested in learning more about my ancestors. Id love to see pictures of tablets too, since i probably cant see any in person. I can probably get some things translated by friends of mine, if they are not yet translated.
My question is this, why does genesis one sound ao familer to the egyptian bennu stone creation story. Moses wrote genesis and he was an egyptian so why do we say its mesopotamian and not egyptian? Which came first?
Moses wrote much later, in part to critique the various creation accounts that had come down from ancient times. There are therefore some similarities, which would be expected, but also striking and dramatic differences between Moses and other traditions.
To religious people who believe in the *fictional* Abrahamic god YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah, please learn his origins. He was originally a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon and son of the chief Canaanite god El. Yes, the *fictional* god of the Israelites and Christians is the same *fictional* god of the Muslims as well - the Abrahamic god. *Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El.* Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that *“the Most High, El,* gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). *The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.* *It is generally accepted in the modern day, however, that Yahweh originated in southern Canaan as a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon* and the Shasu, as nomads, most likely acquired their worship of him during their time in the Levant. *Yahweh in the Canaanite Pantheon* The biblical narrative, however, is not as straightforward as it may seem as it also includes reference to the Canaanite god El whose name is directly referenced in `Israel' (He Who Struggles with God or He Who Perseveres with God). *El was the chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon and the god who, according to the Bible, gave Yahweh authority over the Israelites:* When the *Most High [El]* gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the Sons of God. For Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9, Masoretic Text). The Canaanites, like all ancient civilizations, worshipped many gods but chief among them was the sky-god El. *In this passage from Deuteronomy, El gives each of the gods authority over a segment of the people of earth and Yahweh is assigned to the Israelites who, in time, will make him their supreme and only deity; but it is clear he existed beforehand as a lesser Canaanite god.* Yahweh, according to Amzallag, was transformed from one god among many to the supreme deity by the Israelites in the Iron Age (c.1200-930 BCE) when iron replaced bronze and the copper smelters, whose craft was seen as a kind of transformative magic, lost their unique status. *In this new age, the Israelites in Canaan sought to distance themselves from their neighbors in order to consolidate political and military strength and so elevated Yahweh above El as the supreme being and claimed him as their own.* His association with the forge, and with imagery of fire, smoke, and smiting, worked as well in describing a god of storms and war and so Yahweh's character changed from a deity of transformation to one of conquest. *As the Israelites developed their community in Canaan, they sought to distance themselves from their neighbors and, as noted, elevated Yahweh above the traditional Canaanite supreme deity El.* They did not, however, embrace monotheism at this time. The Israelites remained a henotheistic people through the time of the Judges, which predates the rise of the monarchy, and throughout the time of the Kingdom of Israel (c.1080-c. 722). Google *"Yahweh - **WorldHistory.Org.**"* Watch Dr Christine Hayes at Yale University. Watch lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards and lecture 8 from 12:00 to 19:00 minutes. Google *"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopaedia."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - Realhistoryww"* Google *"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."* Google *"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."* Google *"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."* Google *"Married Deities: Asherah and Yahweh in Early Israelite Religion - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."* Google *"The Boundaries of the Nations - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"* Mark Smith: *"Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh's Ascendancy - Lehi's Library."* Google *"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."* Google *"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis / Is That in the Bible?"* Google *"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion / Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."* Google *"Decoupling YHWH and El - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
excellent comment. anyone interested in this from a secular point if view should skip this and watch the yale lectures instead. this guy is just a pastor spewing thinly veiled christian ideology.
Perhaps who ever constructed the Biblical account were not aware that there HAD to be a battle for preeminence in the Beginning. In our modern view we would not think there would have to be a battle for preminence but to me I can see and understand the Enuma Eilish's beginning. As in life there is always a battle to establish ones self in a thing or a place. Look at all the Biblical accounts of this. Ex. Gen 25:23, Daniel 3, Life of Jesus, Moses, Apostle Paul etc and many more. There is always a struggle/battle when declaring/ establishing ones self as something. Evidently as written in the Enuma Elish even for God himself. Also, I personally dont find the beginning of the Enuma Eilish laughable as myth because it sounds unusual. In my opinion as an ancient text I feel it has truths that as such I feel I should bring my thinking in alignment with rather than dismiss because it does not seem to fit into current day imagining. What I mean is it is said that quite possibly we could be living our lives in this world in a computer simulation of sorts on a quantum level . So what I'm saying is perhaps the beginning of the Enuma Eilish though written strangely, may be written very correctly. as the exact quantum level events of the computer code for the simulation we may be living in. Does anyone out there get me ???
Good information from the Christian side, I enjoyed it. I do believe though that there are too many similarities to say the Hebrews didn't borrow, especially Abram, being from that region and would know all of the stories. I think those elohim are the same ones mentioned in the sunerian tablets, and that's why there's all kinds of conflict in genesis between them. I do not think Yahweh is the almighty God, but part of the divine counsel as psalms 82 says and I think Deut 28 or 32 where it says El Elyon gave Israel to Yah. What's more fascinating to me is why Jesus (Yeshua) never called Yah by name and taught a different doctrine than what Moses was taught.
The truth is humanity does not know the truth and we are piecing together stones and copies of sheep skin passed down for thousands of years and before that information was passed down via word of mouth. The Bible is an awesome and incredible book but does it really have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Only God knows. Thanks for the Video...loved it..
+Kachina Lively the tanak was pieced together from other myths... proven to any rational person which unfortunately excludes many of the faith driven types. The 'bible' for me refers to the old hebrew writings called the 'hebrew bible' the word bible is a greek rough translation for paparus whcih it was written on since they had no direct translation and it was mistranslated again into many other languages from that. the 'bible' does itself not claim to be written by 'god'. anywhere.......Blame that misunderstanding on the Protestants..
I believe your your search for the truth is honest and so I say this to you: we know the word of God is true because of what truth is. Truth is by definition defined by that which is infinite and therefore can always come back to. That is to say that you might say that truth is like a river. You can always go back to it for food and water. In this truth is infinite. This is the case with the bible. For this reason and because of it, we know that the word of God is just that, truth.
Genesis 1 is not so much a natural account of natural events as it is "God declaring the end from the beginning" a sort of blue print or road map of the rest of the story. A spiritual account of spiritual events not necessarily visible to the natural eye. Great lecture Mr. Bruce Gore.
I'ma throw this ring in: the Enuma Elish is talking about what happened at the big bang, how the dust clouds and liquid gases formed the planets in this area of the galaxy and how a planet on a wide orbit helped to establish the stations of our planets in this solar system. That Tiamat was a large planet that crashed with the wide orbiting planet. That part of her became the outer ring of our solar system, part of her became the inner asteroid belt, and a third part became the Earth itself. They personified it to make it a tale to tell. When Babylon was in rule under Marduk, Marduk was added to the story as the slayer of Tiamat, just as he was given all the attributes of the proceeding Gods and rulership over them on the throne of Anu, as decreed by the king of that region of the time. But there is also the possibly that some of the tablets got mixed up and the end of the story is the beginning of another. The Enuma Elish appears to be the telling of the establishment of the cosmos at the celebration of Marduk, where the Igigi were in attendance, by Enki,(Ea, Nudimmud,) his father. And it doesn't mention the creation of mankind in an intelligible way as much is missing. The mentioned men are Scorpion men and Fish men, but no hu men. Most ideas about this epic are pure interpolated conjecture. Blessed be.
Marduk was another name for Nebiru. What the speaker doesn't understand is that the tale is about how the planets, most importantly, Earth, came into being. These were not gods fighting but the planets being formed from chaos. Tamult was a planet, as you say, who came into contact with either Marduk or one of its' moons....which created the asteroid belt and the earth. The asteroid belt then became known as the heaven. So you have waters above and below
It can be a both/and. The story is told in such a way as to show that the creator God is LORD of all, and also in a way that can guide man in his study and understanding of the origins of life.
It's funny how the Sumerian text supports the biblical account of creation. Including the 7 days of creation, the creation of light, firmament separating the waters above from below, the sun, moon and stars within the firmament, the heavens, the earth and the "netherworld". By the way? Ishtar is pronounced Easter which is the holiday in which we claim to be celebrating Jesus.
I dont believe The Abzu is literally a body of water. Abzu is the "Begetter of the Gods". Enki's temple in Eridu is called E-Abzu which means "House of the Cosmic Waters", and Enki is said to be the Lord of The Abzu. Sumerians believed outer space was like a body of water, an ocean. The Abzu is the Cosmos, as in the Universe. They spoke a lot in symbolism because they had no exact terminology of cosmic objects. The Abzu is a very big part of Sumerian cosmic geography.
The battle between Marduk and Tiamat doesn't sound so rediculous if you tell the story as planets rather than Gods or dieties. I really enjoyed this presentation but you are skipping over the story very quickly and making the beliefs of the Sumerians sound more myth like to lead your audience to your beliefs. I think it is better if you let people make up their own mind. I'm not sure of the nature of your teachings but their is a lot of astronomical evidence that would suggest the "epic of creation" is not as far fetched as some other theories that have been suggested since the beginning of humankind.
Marduk also know al Maldek an ancient planet blown to destruction by perhaps a planetary collision or some other "chaos", that allegedly split it in half, and the whole event led to the creation of the inner solar system. The "dome" is the asteroid belt. This is what I believe this text is referring to.
Seems logical to me that if you find similar accounts of a worldwide catastrophe from various cultures from all over the planet, literally hundreds of accounts of a worldwide flood, then it certainly has to have some basis in reality. The story is always portrayed as a historical account that would be common knowledge or at least the reader is expected to be aware that there had been a catastrophic flood in which our ancestors survived by divine intervention. Just because there are earlier accounts; this in no way diminishes the authority of the scriptures. In them we learn the true account of what happened and why.
The storey of Tiamat ( earth) is when the planet was broken into 2 by a cosmic event. The other half of the earth formed the moon. These Gods are the elements and the movements of the planets. Murduk and Enil are the Annunaki and Anu is the most high God or who they called the heavenly one.
You say Presbyterians try to find the middle ground, yet many Presbyterians like yourself are completely uncompromising about God and His holiness and sovereignty. Much love from a young Baptist! Really enjoying your lectures!
40:18 Like Goldylocks I guess. But once a man allows that 2+2 could be other than four, there is no way to stop the spread of error, as Luther himself complained, after it was too late. Thanks for the content.
"he doesn't have to fight!" except at the end where he fights a... ... ... lady on a dragon... almost as if... tiamat was split into two... and the word of mouth accommodated for that
I'm joking of course. Tiamot splitting into two was carried to Greece where it became Gaia, who very much resembles the concept of Ki mixed with the antagonistic form of Tiamot, and keeping in mind how Tiamot birthed Kingu (something you neglected to mention, understandably as it drags out the story) just as how Gaia birthed Typhon and proceeded to ride Typhon into battle against Zeus.
This is cognitive dissonance at its peak. How can one regard the Enuma Elish as pure myth, but the Genesis story that follows it, is fact.... that is crazy
Not a prosperity preacher! But a teacher giving away his work for free, or did you have to pay for your pleasure? Yet Critical, do you give your work away freely?
Kinda late, but just to set the record straight-Enuma Elish is an Akkadian myth not Sumerian. Written in the same cuneiform signs but different language.
Thanks for the feedback. 'Elohim' (literally, 'gods' in Hebrew) is one of about a dozen proper names applied to the deity of the Old Testament. I have opted for the virtually universally used English language convention, which is commonly applied in the English translations of the Old Testament (e.g., In the beginning, God...) for these lectures. To do otherwise would draw unnecessary and unintended attention to an agenda that I do not desire to suggest. I appreciate your interest.
@@GoreBruce Thanks for the Quick response. It's always great to learn new things. Given the motif of the of Genesis, there is no indication that the god in Genesis one or two is the supreme.The ancient Israelite answer to the mystery of creation and beginning .Using the word "God" kind of gave the impression that the God of Genesis is superior to other Gods. Whereas the word "God" itself means to Invoke. Do you have a lecture on Genesis two?
...not on the precise point you are raising, but note that the plural "Elohim" is called the Hebrew "plural of intensity," and on its face means "the only and true God." Genesis 1 was thus written in part as a critique of the polytheistic conceptions common in Mesopotamian mythology.
I believe they were telling the story of our universe & how we came to be. The Bible clearly took the Enuma Elish & remixed it to what we have now in the Bible. Really, Liked his lecture though
Bruce, I love your teachings, but I do want to suggest looking into something that has changed my perspective on the "myths" of the ancient people. Like you, I agree they were much smarter than we give them credit for, and the fact that cultures of the same time period but separated by great distances share common creations, common myths, and common arts. Essentially, all of the facts of the "Ancient Alien" beliefs without the Aliens. There is a TH-cam channel called "Thuderbolts of the Gods". This is not a Christian site, but it proposes, based on all these common findings, a different solar system, a different paradigm to creation that happens to line up more with the Bible than our common view of changes requiring vast periods of time. It supports the mass global destructions of the flood, and proposes how natural forces would have caused all the plagues of Egypt including the water parting (granted, I believe God controls the natural forces). This is not some conspiracy boy, but physicists, and other scientists, including geologists that stand for this idea of the electric universe. I do not believe that the ancients knew these were myths. I propose that they saw something so vastly different in their sky than we do today, that the order of the planets, the sun, the moons, were different than today and that massive changes in these caused the cataclysms of the Bible. Again, I believe God directs all of these - they explain the long day in Joshua, they explain the changing of the sun for Hezekiah, they explain the Exodus, the hail that destroyed the armies for Joshua. It's certainly worth a look.
If Mesopotamia was the earliest civilization, how does that reconcile with Abraham, who after leaving Ur and later arriving in Egypt, it had already passed its peak period - i.e. the era of pyramid building?
I Love how curious we are today about the origin of the Bible, but yet why is it very hard to believe that’s how it happened And without the Samarian creation story it wouldn’t be Genesis story to begin with. Everything in the Genesis story is brushed and paint it for us human of modern time just like this speaker says it’s hard to imagine these things happen! why not. understand a lot of things in the old testament Bible was borrowed from the Samarian Akeddian and Babylonians it’s the truth. When The archaeologists risked there life to translate for us the cuneiform tablets to today’s language so we know the real truth. And whether you wanna believe it or not. It’s up to you, what is written, presented to us from the Genesis story it was written prior before and they copied things that they wanted us to know and and messed up the whole thing and today the truth is hard to believe it. Just so you know there is a lot of documentary a lot of talks and lectures coming out about the creation of the Samaritan, but ask yourself why now? And Have we been lied to and why?
An honest question here - Why is the Mesopotamian creation a myth but biblical creation text a truth?
That's a fair question! I'd answer briefly from three perspectives.
First, in terms of literary genre, there is a notable difference between the two accounts. Enuma Elish was quite likely written with the intention that it be taken as myth, in the same way that the myths of the Greeks were intended to be so understood. Genesis 1 may indeed have mythical elements to it, but one would have to say that at the very least, it represents a radically 'stripped-down' myth, with a much more simple and elegant literary construction. That doesn't mean it's 'true,' of course, but at least it suggests it's different.
Second, historically, Enuma Elish does not purport to set forth a continuity with the drama it describes and actual human history as such. The Genesis text does. Whether one accepts the account of Adam and Eve as actual history, it is clear that the biblical narrative sets forth actual human connections that trace back to those two and their situation in the garden. Again, this does not mean it's 'true,' but it does distinguish the biblical narrative from pure myth.
Third, as to its truth, that is of course a very different question. A commitment to the truth of the biblical narrative flows from a conviction that the narrative represents some kind of revelation which is reliable and trustworthy. A skeptic could readily acknowledge the rather striking difference between Enuma Elish and the biblical text, without necessarily concluding the biblical text is 'true.' The truth commitment follows from a broader conviction of faith that touches the entire biblical content.
Thanks for a thoughtful question.
@@GoreBruce Thanks for taking the time to reply!
@@GoreBruce Forget the differences . Which came first predating the latter by thousands of years.
Great question and I wish this question would be talked about like what Donald trump said today or what's kanye or cardi B doing
@@GoreBruce Myths are presented as fictional allegories while Religions present the 'myth' as factual reality.
This guys page is a gold mine.
Bradley Buck Thanks!
+Bradley Buck, I agree totally!
If an explorer traveled to a country and encountered an indigenous population. During the time he spent there he had many interactions with the indigenous population. The indigenous people learnt about his ship the crew and many other things about their visitors, until they sailed away. Many years passed and the indigenous population had passed down this encounter to their generations , and in time there were stories written about it some of the story became distorted throughout time and parts remained factual. Many years later in another part of the world the ancestors of the explorers compiled an accurate journal of their forefathers encounters for their future generations. As time passed the discovery of the indigenous account was unearthed, it had striking similarities to the journal but also striking differences. Do we assume the journal was plagiarized from the indigenous account due to the fact that their writings are older? Do we assume that the journal is nothing but a myth do to the findings that was unearthed that are also assumed as myths? Or does the unearthed findings give authenticity to their journal that preceded the unearthed indigenous account?
Dan last I'm pretty sure we start with the first written stories, and firsthand accounts( history) when it comes to importance/truth, then move to the OT. You can from there compare to archaeological discoveries to see which fits better considering real world evidence(again, OT is lacking here, as there is no evidence for the exodus, nor does OT match king lists, other firsthand accounts of the time, or archaeology. That being said, Babylonian accounts are the most plentiful and complete, but are also co-opted like OT ( sumerians were not Semitic, babylonians and akkadians were, at least where majority is concerned.) anything regarding Marduk I personally discount.
A gold mine indeed it is, such a blessing!
Love Love these lectures, it is almost impossible today to find something this great to talk about History. What a Gem.
history? mostly myth.
It’s a myth
▪
I just started looking into this...
Seems like more of a campfire fun storytime thing .
⬛
lol, then you haven’t looked into it very far
Go to Mythvision.
Searched TH-cam for what seems like ages... For a lecture exactly like this. Truly a blessing in many senses of the word.
This is so exciting stuff, i am binge watching the entire series. Thank you Pastor!!
These lectures are just phenomenal. Thanks for your work.
Thank you!
I have learnt so much in such a short time. The book of Genesis has become alive to me! Thank you for sharing with us😃
▪
Correct me if I'm wrong, but
This isn't part of the actual genesis book .
⬛
I am Hebrew Israelite and we pride ourselves on having a deep understanding of the bible and our ability to use other historical accounts of biblical history to see and understand The books deeper although no other books can be mated with the bible it's good to learned with discernment. I say that to say this man has connected a lot of dots for me and gave.me a thirst to read up on other characters to understand the atmosphere and motivation of our ancestors and how the biblical account of history is woven throughout world history causing all sorts of changes that I see clearly after learn from this man of The Most High ..... thank you sir and keep up the good works!
Thank you, my friend, I appreciate the kind feedback!
You're a what?
@@wretch1 Israelite
The bible copied sumerians
Great presentation and reconciliation between Genesis and Enuma Elish so that a lay person can understand the reconciliation. Really enjoyed his presentation on Enuma Elish.
▪
How does this correlate with the genesis book ?
⬛
I watch this presentation over and over again whenever it comes to my mind. It is amazing! ❤️🇹🇷 Loves from turkey 😊
Thank you!
@@GoreBruce
▪
So, are you making the claim that this is in fact a part of the Book Of Genesis?
⬛
@@2NDFLB I am suggesting that Genesis 1 was written, in part, as a critique of the Mesopotamian myth. Thanks for your interest.
That is so cool! Ancient mesopotamia holds some of the most fascinating cultures. It's amazing they were one of the earliest civilizations.
This Lectureship is very helpful for my understanding of the historical context of world history laid beside biblical history. Thank you for providing these lectures on TH-cam. Should receive the book this week. Looking forward to it.
Thank you!
So excited to find your channel. I'm a homeschooling mom trying to each my kids the Bible and history in context. We are delving deep into ancient Near Eastern history and there were so many things that confused me - your videos are helping make sense of it. Thanks!
Hi Simone - thanks so much. You may be interested in a structured online course I have developed for home schoolers on this topic. It includes quizzes, essays, collateral readings, etc. If you'd like to take a look, go to my website, www.brucegore.com, and click the online courses tab. Thanks again!
This pastor is talking through his neck look up Billy Carson..unveiling the secrets of the Enuma Elish
I’m loving the fact that the lessons are not about religion, it’s really about History. How awesome it is to be educated with great information. It sucks that I couldn’t even see and travel these rich in history countries: Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon. Truly, with all these chaos, I now understand why God chose the Israelites to be His people during ancient times.
Binge watching all episodes.
how do you spell that language writing? cuneiform? ??
What's intriguing to me is how the torah does claim there's water above just like the enuma elish, but only the torah brings the water down during the flood. As far as I know, the biblical texts has no further insistence of water above after that point.
See, Psa.148:4, for example.
Bruce Gore Have you ever seen the epitaph of Werner Vaughan Brown on his tombstone?
Can't say that I have.
It's simply "Psalm 19:1". Do you know who he was? I think there may actually be a firmament up there.
It’s Wernher von Braun the Nazi rocket scientist.
I think this explanation has many truths, but i also think that you kind of missed the main reason why this story is so controversial in the first place, because what it sounds like is that elements of it are BORROWED to serve as a story of creation, while other parts were discarded for who knows why. This part i haven’t found an answer for, and is a little concerning.
One of the Very best Speakers I've ever heard right here, he has the Gift of many ways of bringing comparative relations and similarities to Light in a Total Scholarship breakdown without stepping on the status quo beliefs!!
POV: you came for fate stay night and stayed for the lecture
Thanks Pastor Gore. I love your lectures.
Thank you!
If Genesis didn't borrow from the Enuma Elish why there are so many similaries in two stories a thousand years apart? The speaker addresses the differences in great detail but not the similarities and where they come from.
I'm thinking since Abraham grew up there he knew the sumerian tales in great detail. Or, there was another source that both took from.
It seems to me that the elohim are the same gods the sumerians talked about (the Devine council) psalms 82.
Good lecture nonetheless
This shows a common ancestor of the truth given by God. Things survived both the flood and the division of the languages.
Both the Sumerians and and Hebrews had common ancestors dating back to the days of the fall
I have spent my life trying to combine religious teachings and what my voices tell me to teach my children the truth. I want to spend the remainder of my life traveling and learning! What type of schooling do I need to fulfill my destiny of complete truth?
View each day as a new day in school, and each experience as a new lesson in the classroom of Christ. Read good books, and let each book you read lead you to the next one. "Complete truth" is a great aim, but an impossible target to hit. Always be more interested in the truth you are pursuing than the truth you believe you are possessing.
I’ll join you. With my kid..:)
There's a lot good here, but I do wish that Mr. Gore had been more up-front initially about his Presbyterian standpoint that Genesis is a divine revelation and (seemingly) that the Enuma Elis is not. I could have intuited this from his bio, but I jumped in and was often surprised by the ethnicentrism in both analysis and editorializing. I thought I was watching a classroom lecture, and was cought off-guard throughout by the clear personal preference being given to Genesis over and above the "bizarre" EE - which is fine as a personal or theological statement, but which would be inappropriate in a college classroom today.
Your outline of Sumerian dieties simplifies the information I have noted. The way your information is presented is going to save me many valuable hours sir. Am a grey-beard now and have started learning just how precious time actually is (here). Am glad to have this information available on the WWW. (Would like to thank Mr. Berner-Lee)
+Lon W. As one grey-beard to another, I also need all the help I can get! Time is running out!
I think they were both right in their own time. We arrived here, built and placed into a system that requires learning. An education system, a both personal and collective system at the same time. Certain truths have been discovered and recorded by many groups, all seeking knowledge. Time tells truth when applied to new ways of thinking. The Bible is understandable then and now, accuracy is pointer of truth. A collection of revelations not possible before Abraham. Many times one string of thought opens the biggest doors. The idea of one God was a revelation that changed the way some viewed our reality, leading to new ideas to build on. Those ideas are as grand now as they were then, volume and virility of growth is a pointer towards truth. Revelations are just one new idea birthed out of little ones before, a collection of thoughts that reveal something that the thoughts by themselves would not reveal. The Bible is recorded revelations of truths within the system that were always there, only now revealed. Abraham, started a growth spurt in knowledge,one that had been built on slowly, built on many smaller thoughts that converged
Thank you so much for the explanation.
My son has been listening to you for a while now and loves your lessons. He’s 16 and found your TH-cam videos by searching ‘historical context of the Bible’ 😍😍
Thank you! It is a joy to hear from you! Give your very bright son my warmest regards!
I don't have to know everything because I know He's good and I know enough that i trust Him and His Ways!! And its nothing of myself, it is all a gift from Him!! Fascinating to learn of Him though, Thanks for this message!! ❤❤❤
"They thought it was water above the dome" is a literalist interpretation/assumption that the symbol of "The Waters of Chaos" was a literal misunderstanding of physical nature. These waters are symbolic of a greater mystery, not a physical cosmology. If they they thought that water was literally on the other side of the dome, "because it was blue", then where did they say the "water" went at night?
For a responsible treatment of the Mesopotamian cosmology, please see Georges Roux, Ancient Iraq (Penguin History).
www.amazon.com/Ancient-Iraq-Third-Penguin-History/dp/014012523X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1547306680&sr=8-1&keywords=roux+ancient+iraq
Thanks for your interest.
@@GoreBruce why the book look like a college textbook
@@sabbath4879 I wrote it to be a textbook.
@@GoreBruce u got me
I would like to know please - which was built first: the Egyptian pyramids or the Mesopotamian ziggurats?
Sumerian. Mesopotamian ziggurat for sure. Sumerian is the oldest known civilization in earth.
Ziggurats by about 500 years or so
“Feel the wrath of the genuine article”
Is there a chance ruaa mean river??
The Hebrew word (ruach) means wind, or breath, or spirit. There is a different word for river.
@@brucegore4373 thank you
How old is this? Göbekli Tepe has been known for quite some time.
May I ask where you think the Sumerians got their myths from? Thank you.
I have read many theories, some quite fanciful. It has been an intriguing question for centuries, but I claim no special insight nor expertise in the matter. Thanks for your interest.
Bruce Gore Thank you for your reply.
@@GoreBruce they got them from the oral history of proto-genesis that has been adapted to obscure and replace god with the Pantheon of demons who mimic and twist the God of the bible.
Think of a diverging game of telephone that stretches from the Adamic family essentially being corrupted as humanity spread across the Earth and moved away from God.
Bruce, have you read John Lennox's "Seven days that divide the world"? He covers some of the same points. It occurred to me that you might have interacted with each other.
If you have to redo the series would you do it?
Love these very informative lectures. Question: where does Job fit into this? just wondering how much earlier than Abraham. Thank you.
The date for Job remains a remarkable mystery. There are arguments galore, but none are compelling.
@@GoreBruce is satan in the book of job lucifer the morning star lying snake?
Since this video was made the Gobekli Tepe has been dated to around 8000 B.C. and is currently considered the oldest settlement yet discovered in the world. It certainly is NOT on the scale of Mesopotamia but it was a civilized human settlement. It predates the creation of the universe as calculated by Answers in Genesis. 🤔
No bias in non believers no manipulation of evidence
✝️Jesus is Lord 🕊️
@37:42 Why is it that when we discuss old stories like the Enuma Elish that have been "plagiarized" by the bible we need to see "un-literally" and yet, the bible text, (which consists of the same plagiarized content) is to be taken literally?? Isn't that a fallacy?
I'm LCMS and I've often struggled with reconciling the Bible as literal truth with the obvious logical impossibilities of doing so. In general, we allow ourselves only to teach what the biblical text says as free from extra interpretation and commentary as is possible. As you can imagine, teaching theology in a vacuum like that comes with some problems. We're currently struggling with our private schools in how to teach science while sticking to strict literal interpretation - it's not easy. What I want to know is this: Is there anywhere in scripture, of even in the early church fathers that suggests we should take things so literally? I can't help but wonder if literal interpretation is a modern overreaction to secularism.
It seems plain enough that the New Testament does not always take the Old Testament in a 'literal' sense, in the way you are using that term (cf. e.g., Acts 15: 16-18). The difficulty, however, may go a little deeper. The word 'literal' is actually connected to the word 'literature,' as in 'literary genre.' To take the bible 'literally' (in the correct sense of the term) means to respect the type of literature under examination. Thus, the task of understanding the intended sense of the text requires some fair-minded hermeneutics, which is often in short supply in certain circles of biblical interpretation! Thanks for your thoughtful comments!
Quite so! Unfortunately, you'll find widely varying definitions of 'reality' among readers of the Bible, because 'reality' tends to be a function of presuppositions, which by the nature of the case are non-demonstrable (which is why they are presuppositions!).
The term 'hermeneutics' itself, however, simply refers to the rules of sensible interpretation, the same rules commonly applied to any piece of literature (or for that matter, to this morning's newspaper).
Depending on what parts of Scripture you refer to, it becomes easier or harder to take it literally. I think we can say that everything in the Bible can be taken as true but not necessarily as factually true. Certainly certain parts are not literal - the government is not literally on Jesus' shoulders. My church's general teaching is that we should take the Bible only as figurative when it seems to clearly be so and never otherwise. I struggle with such a hard-line mindset. The problem, I think, is our incomplete knowledge of the universe and our incomplete comprehension of Scripture. Unfortunately, the Bible is a bit like a cloud - you see what you want to see. I wonder if the answer isn't one or the other but possibly both? Did God create the world in 6 days or the universe in 13 billion years? Can both be true? Is it us that fail to understand how? I have no answers for this. It's a challenge I have faced as both a rational and a conservative Christian. My church is somewhat reactionary on this topic and I want to support them but I have trouble blindly following anything without analyzing it.
BassPlayer60134
watch "Mauro Biglino". He translates the O.T and all mystery disappears. I am sure you can merge some of the "creators" science and maintain your faith.
Uh, he teaches that Aliens and UFOs are in the Old Testament. *cuckoo clock sounds*
I’m enjoying your informative videos. Thanks so much for sharing. Ancient Israel and Mesopotamia were a bit distant from one another, so, it’s conceivable the author(s) of Genesis did not read Enuma Elish.
That is a hypothetical possibility, but given the well traveled roadways of the 'fertile crescent' that connected Mesopotamia with Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Egypt, not a probability. Thanks for the feedback.
Abraham came from Ur and it seems inconceivable that he would never have heard of or read the Enuma Elish. There was no "ancient Israel" in existence at that time
@@curtisking5138
Yeah...It's not like ancient Israel never had any visitors from other nations and weren't influenced by other cultures.
Genetic studies show that today's various Jewish ethnic groups are mixed.
It was even found that they have 3 to 5 percent SubSaharan African ancestry.
I am part Ashkenazi Jewish, and so I am interested in Jewish genetics.
@@fomalhauto : The term "Jewish" is nebulous. In one instance it describes the follower of a particular religion, and in another instance it is said to be the descendants of a particular particular person. Sometimes it is an indication of a particular race or a specific ethnicity culture.
Moses grew up and was educated a prince in Egypt
Praise the Lord for leaving us, teachers for purpose of building up the body of Christ till His return.
Lord is a title... Yahuah is the Name of Elohim... study Hebrew / Cepher
Also, the Sumerians knew the earth was round. The were the first to map out the solar system, if you look at ancient tablets you can see small map of the solar system, the sun in the middle and other spheres (planets) around the middle sphere. Im sure you and many others have seen those tablets its not really hidden or anything.
Eurostar 07 Earth is not a spinning ball!
Lol The creation story lays out flat earth cosmology you imbecile
@Chris Farrell no he didn't you have no understanding neither knowledge of the history of the Bible and of Christianity
@@earthisnotaball Youre a fukctard.
@@mattanderson5921 Insulting on a Christian channel?
Came back to this lecture tonight. Dang, the Internet is so cool. As I am taking notes keep messing up... US Civil War was my major and had the Potomac River... so Mesopotamia and Potomac keep getting interchanged as I key-in. Another guy I read his studies is a Greek linguist type. Dang Greeks... can't live with it, can't live without it.
Calling Enuma Elish Sumerian is a bit misleading since the Babylonians wrote this waaaaayyyyy after the Sumerian myth of creation.
I'm so glad I found Mr Gore
I've been doing some research on the ancient backdrop of the Bible. Thank you.
Thanks for the lecture. I listened to the Epic of Gilgamesh yesterday so this puts more insight relating it to the Bible.
But wait, isn't trying to emphasize the differences a bit like trying to show how different Spider-Man is from Batman? I mean, I think Marvel comics writers were completely aware of Batman ( and influenced by him). At the end of the day, people trying to argue that Spider-Man is real should be ridiculed here in the 21st century. Right?
Many men are God in their own mind and proclaim God has no right to destroy that which He created. When the judgment of God comes upon men, the men go insane.
I respect Mr. Gore's intelligence and enjoy his very informative lectures!
The Enuma Elish may be " bizarre" but so is a book/ god
that took the time to ban eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics but didn't care to condem human slavery, war or keeping the young virgin girls as sex slaves.
It's also "bizarre" that:
1. An all powerful God would lie, be jealous and have regrets.
2. A loving God would endorse cultural racism, land theft, misogyny and killing women, babies and animals.
Thanks for the thoughtful feedback!
> that took the time to ban eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics but didn't care to condem human slavery, war or keeping the young virgin girls as sex slaves.
that was just laws moses set forth in levitcus for their 40 years in the desert. additionally human slavery was the trend durin those times yet moses laws for slavery were very humane compared to others. for exapmle it allowed slaves to be freed.
> 1. An all powerful God would lie, be jealous and have regrets.
god doesnt lie. that is the trait of lucifer.
god can be jealous and repent his creations...so what? its just his character and personality yet his repentence for man was for good and understandable reasons.
> 2. A loving God would endorse cultural racism, land theft, misogyny and killing women, babies and animals.
"endorse" is a poor word choice and doesnt include the context of why god instructed joshua to take the land of canaan. they sacrificed babies to lucifer amongs other things. you make it seem like god is doing this for fun and his own amusement. he floods his creations, he rains fire and brimstones on his creation, yes, but have u considered why? definitley not for amusiment. your word choice of 'endorse' makes it like he sponsored the event.
New International Version
5The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created-and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground-for I regret that I have made them.” 8But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
You made a statement that God doesn't need our worship, but that we need it.....how do you figure we need to worship? Also on several places throughout the bible God does ask of worship.....this comment you made interest me, is it possible to ask you to explain more?
God definitely desires worship. It's true that it's easy to concentrate on history and to ignore God's heart's desire. He definitely wants to be prayed to, and He's definitely a God with intentions toward His creation. It's hard to be someone who understands theology, history and has a practical experience of who God is and what He's trying to do, all at the same time. Most Christians have a loose grasp on all three. I praise the Lord that someone can explain the enūma elis to us in any capacity. Every member functions according to their measure. Some with a hymn, some with a teaching, some with the historical background of the Bible! If you believe you can offer this gentleman some insight into contacting God, do so, but as a brother in the Lord! Jesus is Lord!
Is it right as a Christian to say "Amen" if it comes from Amun, the Egyptian deity?
I would say the premise of your question is highly doubtful, but either way, the fact that Jesus used the word frequently, and took it from the Old Testament scriptures should be sufficient to resolve the matter.
@@GoreBruce First, thank you for taking the time to respond. I honestly appreciate it. Second, Jesus uses it at the beginning of sentences, and not at the end of a prayer. Every Christian I know uses it after a prayer. So I guess I should rephrase that. Is it normal to use Amen after prayer if Jesus didn't? Also, when I search the etymology of the word "Amen", it seems to point back to the Egyptian deity. If you have a different thought on the etymology I am all ears.
How he explains the parallel of both texts
Brilliant presentation.
God Bless.
33:30, what you say about earthly kingdoms being backed up by divine powers is definitely true. If we read Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and take the DSS and LXX manuscripts into account (which the ESV and NRSV translations do), it talks about how at Babel, God divided the nations according to the sons of God (b'ne elim). This is appealing to the idea that God disinherited the adamic nations at Babel and handed them over to other lesser members of His Heavenly Host to steward, which ends badly (Ps. 82; cf. Ps. 89:5-7).
Would definitely recommend looking into Dr. Michael Heiser's work on the Divine Council and the Deuteronomy 32 worldview.
Johnny Haigs I agree Heiser makes a decent case. His book had not yet been published at the time of this presentation.
@@GoreBruce That's fair, you were on target either way 👍🏻
Great presentation, sir
To Bruce and others in comments,
So important when worshipping 'God' to exactly identify who you want to address.
"The Father of All Spirits" brings forth Creation and His/Her aspects (polarity of left right brain functions) is made manifest in 'The Son of Man' made as flesh and blood in His image, higher than those Annunakis.
The deepest of all questions inside the Creation narrations is which came first (because even in Genesis there is a double narration).
The girls by the river that Enki impregnated are the mitochondrial DNA found in Adapa and Timat, they were from whom Abel and Kain were born, Kain having the recessive RH Neg and was different. Why? Because The Son of Man requested a people to flourish on the Earth and sbdue it "in my image".
That is the only DNA bloodline that by nature, keeps separated from other Blood types.
That last part is an educated guess. They were eye pleasing attractive and comely to the Black-Haired Annunaki.
So the Y(male) chromosome is Annunaki and apparently only Noah's descendants survived the deluge.
We can tell that after Seth that Methusalah 'walked with God' and as well, Enoch 'taken'.
Before the Deluge a very Holy child was birthed from the womb of Sothinim who was an elderly virgin having married Noah's brother, Nir, a Priest.(I am being lazy and recall these names from Enoch 2)
This Holy baby was called Melchizedek. He was 'The Son of Man'. How did He get to be the Son of Man when there is just One Son of Man from the beginning of creation of living things?
How did Jesus also get to be honored as 'The Son of Man'?
One thing that is evident is that the good An els had one up on the bad An els and that is they could minister and help in matters of health, they knew how to clone.
They carried the baby Melchizedek to Paradise before the Deluge.
We are told 'The Son of Man' is a LINEAGE but not of Carnal Knowledge, no intercourse and birthed via a uterus that could specifically bear such special babies.
Peter recognized Jesus as the "Son of Man", to him was given authority to begin to build the perfect Law of Spirituality/Love/Mercy.
In the same breath Jesus said that John would still be alive when He returned (as a thief in the night) for the Bride, the persecuted Elect. He also said He would return to that generation who stood before Him.
So to anyone who says "Jesus says in Revelations" well that is not the voice of Jesus who loves and weeps for those who stand opposing Him.
The Job description of Jesus is Savior, Mentor, Deliverer, Reconciler, Healer etc
He does not Curse as that Spirit does to the Churches of Asia Minor. (John followed behind Paul and Peter and stole the Converts of the Covenant of the free to sit back under the Law, so missing out on the Table of Grace. He was very pedantic on the Law. He said a curse on you readers if ... )
Melchizedek is of the original Law of righteousness found in the Golden rule of Love. Through the loins of Abraham (Annunaki hybrid) the Levites bowed to Melchizedek. The Law of 'The Son of Man' is above the law of Moses.
Jesus was thus bowed to via the cloned flesh and blood of "Son of Man".
What good can come from Jacob who deceived the birthright and stole the blessing. Father of lies. The Bible is about drawing those Anu's Els back to redemption via grace and to also along with them draw back all the Spirits of Men made in the likeness/image of 'The Son of Man'.
At least this is the take I get from all the info and the Heart that is drawing all to a finality of the long Ages.
It was a good lecture.... but I came here for some Fate/GO: Demonic Front Babylonia....
So that's why my search results where cluttered by anime...
@balr0gath snow yes we are
Though FGO doesn't truly represent Tiamat.
Thank you for this lecture.
It made me think about your stance on creation. Starting at 39:05 you speak of two extremes, on the one hand those who claim that Genesis was simply copied from the Enuma Elish, on the other hand those who claim, that everything said in Genesis 1+2 must be completely scientifically accurate. I was wondering what exactly you mean when you say the second one was an error. I have watched many of your church-history lectures and some of your revelation-lectures and that makes it hard and unfair to call you a liberal.
But can you give examples of what must not be understood as scientifically accurate?
I believe in Genesis' accuracy - I am a young-earth-reformed-baptist creationist.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment and question. I think my point in context was that 'scientific accuracy' has been a moving target for millennia. It meant one thing to the pre-socratics, another to Aristotle, another to Ptolemy, another to Copernicus, still another to Kepler, Newton, not to mention Einstein, etc. We think we moderns have got scientific accuracy figured out, but what will scientific opinion be in 500 to 1000 years from now? Maybe Genesis 1 is 'scientifically accurate,' but by whose standard? Ours? Ptolemy's? For my part, I affirm that Genesis 1 is true, regardless of whether the fluctuating standard of 'scientific accuracy' agrees or not. Hope that is responsive to your question. Thanks again for your interest!
That helped a lot, thank you!
Excellent point! The truth of God abides throughout all ages.
+Benzkopf Hello Brother. It's incredible to me that a young earth creationist could dig so deep in the historical and literary data relating to creation as different peoples understood it while embracing a young earth view. Can you explain your background? As a Christian who espouses the ministry of a young earth creationist, as you would call the person I'm referring to, I'm similarly very open to your view. However, what with the constant bombardment of the billion year theory, it would betray a lot of what I have learned and hold to be true to learn that the earth is no more than a few thousand years old. Still, I will obey the heavenly vision if it is shown to me. Thanks for your time.
My Y DNA haplogroup E and Mitochondrial DNA hapologroup J are a lot older than 6,000 years old
Raymond Nolan Scott I like that point. I believe in creation. I also believe the Bible makes it very clear that prior to Adam the creation days were definitely not literal days. There is no doubt the universe is countless eons old. When the Bible says we are created in the image of God, i don’t believe it means God looks like us with legs arms eyes etc. but the image of God to me is his qualities like love and justice. Maybe it’s related to consciousness. So there is no reason to doubt that our genetic code has been around for 10s of thousands of years, but the injection of consciousness could well have occurred 6 thousand years ago. It might explain the sudden change in how Homo sapiens lived, a sudden change from hunter gathers to building cities. Just my thoughts, and I’m a no body lol..
Just to drive my point even further.........
"When the sky above was not named, And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name, And the primeval Apsû, who begat them, And chaos, Tiamat, the mother of them both, Their waters were mingled together, And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen; When of the gods none had been called into being."
See, Apsu (Abzu in English), is primeval.....Primeval definition is "From the earliest time in history". The universe existed since the beginning of time.
Thanks for the insights!
i thought the abzu was s. africa?
Apsu is a Sumerian word, it means Cosmic Waters. Its not a location, i believe its just the universe as a whole. Sumerians had no terms to describe the cosmos.
They might have known that you float in space, and to them, it might seem similar to floating in water so they described the universe as water. Thats what i think. Without reading more Sumerian documents its hard to say what they meant by "Cosmic Waters".
+Bruce Gore i'd like to read more Sumerian documents, do you know where i can find more?
I am Assyrian, you might have heard of us. They are our ancestors, some of us still know cuneiform, but most of us dont unfortunately. Im VERY interested in learning more about my ancestors. Id love to see pictures of tablets too, since i probably cant see any in person.
I can probably get some things translated by friends of mine, if they are not yet translated.
@@eurostar0711 Hey. Check out:
archive.org/details/CompleteWorksportugusEnglish/page/n5
Hope it helps😃
Very interesting and informative. Thank you for this
My question is this, why does genesis one sound ao familer to the egyptian bennu stone creation story. Moses wrote genesis and he was an egyptian so why do we say its mesopotamian and not egyptian? Which came first?
Moses wrote much later, in part to critique the various creation accounts that had come down from ancient times. There are therefore some similarities, which would be expected, but also striking and dramatic differences between Moses and other traditions.
To religious people who believe in the *fictional* Abrahamic god YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah, please learn his origins. He was originally a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon and son of the chief Canaanite god El.
Yes, the *fictional* god of the Israelites and Christians is the same *fictional* god of the Muslims as well - the Abrahamic god.
*Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El.* Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that *“the Most High, El,* gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). *The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.*
*It is generally accepted in the modern day, however, that Yahweh originated in southern Canaan as a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon* and the Shasu, as nomads, most likely acquired their worship of him during their time in the Levant.
*Yahweh in the Canaanite Pantheon*
The biblical narrative, however, is not as straightforward as it may seem as it also includes reference to the Canaanite god El whose name is directly referenced in `Israel' (He Who Struggles with God or He Who Perseveres with God). *El was the chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon and the god who, according to the Bible, gave Yahweh authority over the Israelites:*
When the *Most High [El]* gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the Sons of God. For Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9, Masoretic Text).
The Canaanites, like all ancient civilizations, worshipped many gods but chief among them was the sky-god El. *In this passage from Deuteronomy, El gives each of the gods authority over a segment of the people of earth and Yahweh is assigned to the Israelites who, in time, will make him their supreme and only deity; but it is clear he existed beforehand as a lesser Canaanite god.*
Yahweh, according to Amzallag, was transformed from one god among many to the supreme deity by the Israelites in the Iron Age (c.1200-930 BCE) when iron replaced bronze and the copper smelters, whose craft was seen as a kind of transformative magic, lost their unique status. *In this new age, the Israelites in Canaan sought to distance themselves from their neighbors in order to consolidate political and military strength and so elevated Yahweh above El as the supreme being and claimed him as their own.* His association with the forge, and with imagery of fire, smoke, and smiting, worked as well in describing a god of storms and war and so Yahweh's character changed from a deity of transformation to one of conquest.
*As the Israelites developed their community in Canaan, they sought to distance themselves from their neighbors and, as noted, elevated Yahweh above the traditional Canaanite supreme deity El.* They did not, however, embrace monotheism at this time. The Israelites remained a henotheistic people through the time of the Judges, which predates the rise of the monarchy, and throughout the time of the Kingdom of Israel (c.1080-c. 722).
Google *"Yahweh - **WorldHistory.Org.**"*
Watch Dr Christine Hayes at Yale University. Watch lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards and lecture 8 from 12:00 to 19:00 minutes.
Google *"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."*
Google *"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopaedia."*
Google *"Canaanite Religion - Realhistoryww"*
Google *"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."*
Google *"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."*
Google *"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."*
Google *"Married Deities: Asherah and Yahweh in Early Israelite Religion - Yahweh Elohim."*
Google *"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."*
Google *"The Boundaries of the Nations - Yahweh Elohim."*
Google *"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."*
Google *"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"*
Google *"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"*
Mark Smith: *"Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh's Ascendancy - Lehi's Library."*
Google *"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."*
Google *"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis / Is That in the Bible?"*
Google *"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."*
Google *"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion / Fewer Lacunae."*
Google *"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."*
Google *"Decoupling YHWH and El - Daniel O. McClellan."*
Google *"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."*
Google *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
excellent comment. anyone interested in this from a secular point if view should skip this and watch the yale lectures instead. this guy is just a pastor spewing thinly veiled christian ideology.
Ur of the Khaldies was in Mitanni, not Ur
Perhaps who ever constructed the Biblical account were not aware that there HAD to be a battle for preeminence in the Beginning. In our modern view we would not think there would have to be a battle for preminence but to me I can see and understand the Enuma Eilish's beginning. As in life there is always a battle to establish ones self in a thing or a place. Look at all the Biblical accounts of this. Ex. Gen 25:23, Daniel 3, Life of Jesus, Moses, Apostle Paul etc and many more. There is always a struggle/battle when declaring/ establishing ones self as something. Evidently as written in the Enuma Elish even for God himself.
Also, I personally dont find the beginning of the Enuma Eilish laughable as myth because it sounds unusual. In my opinion as an ancient text I feel it has truths that as such I feel I should bring my thinking in alignment with rather than dismiss because it does not seem to fit into current day imagining. What I mean is it is said that quite possibly we could be living our lives in this world in a computer simulation of sorts on a quantum level . So what I'm saying is perhaps the beginning of the Enuma Eilish though written strangely, may be written very correctly. as the exact quantum level events of the computer code for the simulation we may be living in.
Does anyone out there get me ???
Good information from the Christian side, I enjoyed it. I do believe though that there are too many similarities to say the Hebrews didn't borrow, especially Abram, being from that region and would know all of the stories.
I think those elohim are the same ones mentioned in the sunerian tablets, and that's why there's all kinds of conflict in genesis between them.
I do not think Yahweh is the almighty God, but part of the divine counsel as psalms 82 says and I think Deut 28 or 32 where it says El Elyon gave Israel to Yah.
What's more fascinating to me is why Jesus (Yeshua) never called Yah by name and taught a different doctrine than what Moses was taught.
Just what I needed! Thank you and Lord bless you and your work. (smiley face)
The truth is humanity does not know the truth and we are piecing together stones and copies of sheep skin passed down for thousands of years and before that information was passed down via word of mouth. The Bible is an awesome and incredible book but does it really have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Only God knows. Thanks for the Video...loved it..
+Kachina Lively the tanak was pieced together from other myths... proven to any rational person which unfortunately excludes many of the faith driven types. The 'bible' for me refers to the old hebrew writings called the 'hebrew bible'
the word bible is a greek rough translation for paparus whcih it was written on since they had no direct translation and it was mistranslated again into many other languages from that.
the 'bible' does itself not claim to be written by 'god'. anywhere.......Blame that misunderstanding on the Protestants..
I believe your your search for the truth is honest and so I say this to you: we know the word of God is true because of what truth is. Truth is by definition defined by that which is infinite and therefore can always come back to. That is to say that you might say that truth is like a river. You can always go back to it for food and water. In this truth is infinite. This is the case with the bible. For this reason and because of it, we know that the word of God is just that, truth.
@@charliehutch3533Hebrews 11….
Yes!!! Thank you!!!
Genesis 1 is not so much a natural account of natural events as it is "God declaring the end from the beginning" a sort of blue print or road map of the rest of the story. A spiritual account of spiritual events not necessarily visible to the natural eye. Great lecture Mr. Bruce Gore.
Thanks for the perspective!
I'ma throw this ring in:
the Enuma Elish is talking about what happened at the big bang, how the dust clouds and liquid gases formed the planets in this area of the galaxy and how a planet on a wide orbit helped to establish the stations of our planets in this solar system.
That Tiamat was a large planet that crashed with the wide orbiting planet. That part of her became the outer ring of our solar system, part of her became the inner asteroid belt, and a third part became the Earth itself.
They personified it to make it a tale to tell.
When Babylon was in rule under Marduk, Marduk was added to the story as the slayer of Tiamat, just as he was given all the attributes of the proceeding Gods and rulership over them on the throne of Anu, as decreed by the king of that region of the time. But there is also the possibly that some of the tablets got mixed up and the end of the story is the beginning of another.
The Enuma Elish appears to be the telling of the establishment of the cosmos at the celebration of Marduk, where the Igigi were in attendance, by Enki,(Ea, Nudimmud,) his father.
And it doesn't mention the creation of mankind in an intelligible way as much is missing. The mentioned men are Scorpion men and Fish men, but no hu men.
Most ideas about this epic are pure interpolated conjecture.
Blessed be.
Marduk was another name for Nebiru. What the speaker doesn't understand is that the tale is about how the planets, most importantly, Earth, came into being. These were not gods fighting but the planets being formed from chaos. Tamult was a planet, as you say, who came into contact with either Marduk or one of its' moons....which created the asteroid belt and the earth. The asteroid belt then became known as the heaven. So you have waters above and below
Very well laid out. Cant wait to get your book
It can be a both/and. The story is told in such a way as to show that the creator God is LORD of all, and also in a way that can guide man in his study and understanding of the origins of life.
Cuneiform is sometimes pronounced "que-NEE-i-form". "QUE-ni-form" cuts out a syllable.
It's funny how the Sumerian text supports the biblical account of creation. Including the 7 days of creation, the creation of light, firmament separating the waters above from below, the sun, moon and stars within the firmament, the heavens, the earth and the "netherworld". By the way? Ishtar is pronounced Easter which is the holiday in which we claim to be celebrating Jesus.
I dont believe The Abzu is literally a body of water. Abzu is the "Begetter of the Gods". Enki's temple in Eridu is called E-Abzu which means "House of the Cosmic Waters", and Enki is said to be the Lord of The Abzu.
Sumerians believed outer space was like a body of water, an ocean. The Abzu is the Cosmos, as in the Universe. They spoke a lot in symbolism because they had no exact terminology of cosmic objects.
The Abzu is a very big part of Sumerian cosmic geography.
The battle between Marduk and Tiamat doesn't sound so rediculous if you tell the story as planets rather than Gods or dieties. I really enjoyed this presentation but you are skipping over the story very quickly and making the beliefs of the Sumerians sound more myth like to lead your audience to your beliefs. I think it is better if you let people make up their own mind. I'm not sure of the nature of your teachings but their is a lot of astronomical evidence that would suggest the "epic of creation" is not as far fetched as some other theories that have been suggested since the beginning of humankind.
Ethan Thomas Fair enough. Thanks!
Tiamat is a chaos God. It's a picture of Marduk controling chaos. See michial Heiser
Marduk also know al Maldek an ancient planet blown to destruction by perhaps a planetary collision or some other "chaos", that allegedly split it in half, and the whole event led to the creation of the inner solar system. The "dome" is the asteroid belt. This is what I believe this text is referring to.
Maybe not creation, but massive rearrangement.
I had the same thought while listening, when said, sumerians werent stupid and probably didnt believe the story and thought of it as myth
After searching and searching (in a wide sense of the word), I got to safe land. THANKYOU.
Seems logical to me that if you find similar accounts of a worldwide catastrophe from various cultures from all over the planet, literally hundreds of accounts of a worldwide flood, then it certainly has to have some basis in reality. The story is always portrayed as a historical account that would be common knowledge or at least the reader is expected to be aware that there had been a catastrophic flood in which our ancestors survived by divine intervention. Just because there are earlier accounts; this in no way diminishes the authority of the scriptures. In them we learn the true account of what happened and why.
Amen!
There is no archeological evidence for such a flood. Local floods but do happen
The storey of Tiamat ( earth) is when the planet was broken into 2 by a cosmic event. The other half of the earth formed the moon. These Gods are the elements and the movements of the planets. Murduk and Enil are the Annunaki and Anu is the most high God or who they called the heavenly one.
You say Presbyterians try to find the middle ground, yet many Presbyterians like yourself are completely uncompromising about God and His holiness and sovereignty. Much love from a young Baptist! Really enjoying your lectures!
Fair enough. Thanks for the feedback!
40:18 Like Goldylocks I guess. But once a man allows that 2+2 could be other than four, there is no way to stop the spread of error, as Luther himself complained, after it was too late. Thanks for the content.
This is one of your best lectures and I've seen a few.
"he doesn't have to fight!"
except at the end where he fights a...
...
... lady on a dragon...
almost as if...
tiamat was split into two...
and the word of mouth accommodated for that
I'm joking of course.
Tiamot splitting into two was carried to Greece where it became Gaia, who very much resembles the concept of Ki mixed with the antagonistic form of Tiamot, and keeping in mind how Tiamot birthed Kingu (something you neglected to mention, understandably as it drags out the story) just as how Gaia birthed Typhon
and proceeded to ride Typhon into battle against Zeus.
It's a Metaphor.
But these rivers are in Africa according to the maps of the 1500,1600,1700's. So is Mesopotamia.
The Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek 300 BC
So obviously African Christians used the biblical names for their own places.
Enuma elish means horizon Stories.
El- Eli meaning noble. Illi means a telling or story. An-meaning horizen or sky. Ma means either of or not.
So wich version of creation is more preposterous?
This is cognitive dissonance at its peak. How can one regard the Enuma Elish as pure myth, but the Genesis story that follows it, is fact.... that is crazy
I was wondering how pastors would spin the discovery of the Sumerian tablets to work in their favor and keep their flocks tithing. Now I know.
Not a prosperity preacher!
But a teacher giving away his work for free, or did you have to pay for your pleasure?
Yet
Critical, do you give your work away freely?
DUUUUUDDDE!!!!! Soooo happy I found this channel…. Love your presentation style my friend!!!☘️☘️☘️
Kinda late, but just to set the record straight-Enuma Elish is an Akkadian myth not Sumerian. Written in the same cuneiform signs but different language.
Good lecture, but why so you keep using the word "god"? Why not by his name Elohim that was used in Genesis?
Thanks for the feedback. 'Elohim' (literally, 'gods' in Hebrew) is one of about a dozen proper names applied to the deity of the Old Testament. I have opted for the virtually universally used English language convention, which is commonly applied in the English translations of the Old Testament (e.g., In the beginning, God...) for these lectures. To do otherwise would draw unnecessary and unintended attention to an agenda that I do not desire to suggest. I appreciate your interest.
@@GoreBruce Thanks for the Quick response. It's always great to learn new things. Given the motif of the of Genesis, there is no indication that the god in Genesis one or two is the supreme.The ancient Israelite answer to the mystery of creation and beginning .Using the word "God" kind of gave the impression that the God of Genesis is superior to other Gods. Whereas the word "God" itself means to Invoke.
Do you have a lecture on Genesis two?
...not on the precise point you are raising, but note that the plural "Elohim" is called the Hebrew "plural of intensity," and on its face means "the only and true God." Genesis 1 was thus written in part as a critique of the polytheistic conceptions common in Mesopotamian mythology.
People who worship Jews instead of Jesus like to change the Bible into Hebrew.
I believe they were telling the story of our universe & how we came to be. The Bible clearly took the Enuma Elish & remixed it to what we have now in the Bible. Really, Liked his lecture though
its about the forming if our solarsystem not only earth the chaos was the disk that formed the planets
Interesting hypothesis.
Bruce, I love your teachings, but I do want to suggest looking into something that has changed my perspective on the "myths" of the ancient people. Like you, I agree they were much smarter than we give them credit for, and the fact that cultures of the same time period but separated by great distances share common creations, common myths, and common arts. Essentially, all of the facts of the "Ancient Alien" beliefs without the Aliens. There is a TH-cam channel called "Thuderbolts of the Gods". This is not a Christian site, but it proposes, based on all these common findings, a different solar system, a different paradigm to creation that happens to line up more with the Bible than our common view of changes requiring vast periods of time. It supports the mass global destructions of the flood, and proposes how natural forces would have caused all the plagues of Egypt including the water parting (granted, I believe God controls the natural forces). This is not some conspiracy boy, but physicists, and other scientists, including geologists that stand for this idea of the electric universe. I do not believe that the ancients knew these were myths. I propose that they saw something so vastly different in their sky than we do today, that the order of the planets, the sun, the moons, were different than today and that massive changes in these caused the cataclysms of the Bible. Again, I believe God directs all of these - they explain the long day in Joshua, they explain the changing of the sun for Hezekiah, they explain the Exodus, the hail that destroyed the armies for Joshua. It's certainly worth a look.
Thanks for that. I'll take a look!
God acting in a way that is COMPREHENSIBLE to the ancients. Excellent 👍☺️
Truth will set you free
10:33.... modern understanding is as bad or even worse than back then.
If Mesopotamia was the earliest civilization, how does that reconcile with Abraham, who after leaving Ur and later arriving in Egypt, it had already passed its peak period - i.e. the era of pyramid building?
They are white washing this.
I disagree with the height of Egypt being the old kingdom....the new kingdom was the peak of its power and prestige.
In my mind there are four cradles of civilization. Egypt and sumer....but also China and the indus Valley civilzation .
I Love how curious we are today about the origin of the Bible, but yet why is it very hard to believe that’s how it happened And without the Samarian creation story it wouldn’t be Genesis story to begin with. Everything in the Genesis story is brushed and paint it for us human of modern time just like this speaker says it’s hard to imagine these things happen! why not. understand a lot of things in the old testament Bible was borrowed from the Samarian Akeddian and Babylonians it’s the truth. When The archaeologists risked there life to translate for us the cuneiform tablets to today’s language so we know the real truth. And whether you wanna believe it or not. It’s up to you, what is written, presented to us from the Genesis story it was written prior before and they copied things that they wanted us to know and and messed up the whole thing and today the truth is hard to believe it. Just so you know there is a lot of documentary a lot of talks and lectures coming out about the creation of the Samaritan, but ask yourself why now? And Have we been lied to and why?