Sargon of Akkad as Nimrod

Terrific article, a must read:

http://www.academia.edu/2184113/_2013_Identifying_Nimrod_of_Genesis_10_with_Sar

....

JETS 56/2 (2013) 273–305

IDENTIFYING NIMROD OF GENESIS 10 WITH SARGON OF AKKAD BY 
EXEGETICAL  
 AND
     ARCHAEOLOGICAL  
MEANS


DOUGLAS
PETROVICH

*

 I. INTRODUCTION Perhaps one of the more intriguing and enigmatic characters in the OT is Nimrod, though his name appears only four times throughout the entire Bible (Gen 10:8, 9; 1 Chr 1:10; and Mic 5:6). His biography is narrated in Genesis 10, and opinions about his identity and character have abounded since ancient times. In Philo’s Questiones in Genes in

2.82, which dates to the first half of the first century AD, he refers to Nimrod as a giant who opposes God, and the original and chief of sinners. In Ant . 1.113–114, Josephus considered not only that Nimrod was alive during the tower of Babel incident, but that he was the one who changed the government into a tyrannical one and incited those at Babel into building the infamous tower, in outright defiance of God. At present, opinions on the identity and character of Nimrod have continued to abound, and a discussion of some of the more noted options ventured will proceed shortly. For now, suffice it to say that Nimrod is thought by some to be heroic, while by others to be devious; he is considered by some to be a mere mortal, though by others to be divine. Thus the goal of this essay is to sift through the diversity of options for the identity of this enigmatic figure named Nimrod, and to determine—if at all possible—whether his biography can be matched precisely with any known figure from antiquity. In order to accomplish this endeavor, the task  will require a careful look at relevant exegetical data, and at the archaeological record that serves to inform the field of ancient Near Eastern (hereafter ANE) historical studies, a vital cognate to biblical studies. The task will be accomplished by proceeding through the following steps:(1) presenting a working translation that will act as a reference point for the reader;(2) investigating the various words, phrases, and constructions that act as exegetical clues to illuminate what can be known for certain about Nimrod biographically;(3) reviewing and critiquing some of the more popularly held opinions on the identification of Nimrod; and (4) presenting an alternative candidate for Nimrod with the help of archaeology and the support of the exegetical work that will have been done up to that point. Finally, a conclusion will be presented, and the reader will be able to judge whether the present writer has made a successful case.

....

Constellations: legacy of the dispersion from Babel



Taken from: http://creation.com/constellations-a-legacy-of-babel

by Jonathan F. Henry

There are deep similarities among diverse cultures in their constellations. The similarities stem from an origin at least as remote as the dispersion from Babel, and vastly pre-date cross-cultural missionary outreaches of recent centuries. Cultural differences in constellations have resulted from distinct developments in various people groups since the dispersion from Babel. Constellations appear to contain memories (in corrupted form) of ancient historical events such as the Flood, but evidence does not support the claim that the constellations were a kind of primeval revelation, a ‘gospel in the stars’.

---

Why do diverse cultures have similar constellations?

Wikipedia.org

Figure 1. Peoples dispersing from Babel carried with them memories of historical events embedded in the stories linked with constellations.

If the biblical story of the dispersion from Babel were true, peoples from Babel would carry common ideas which might survive today in the cultures they founded after the dispersion. From a biblical point of view, therefore, any common denominator among diverse modern cultures is a possible indication that all peoples really did once live at a single place identified in the Bible as Babel. A common denominator crossing many cultures past and present is the prevalence of legends about the creation, the Flood and the dispersion from Babel. Flood legends are especially pervasive:

‘It is commonly understood that something like the story of Noah and the flood is part of the mythology of cultures around the globe. It is less widely realized that the unity of the world’s myths goes far beyond such basic similarities. So elaborate and intertwined are the mythic traditions in places as disparate as Mayan Central America, Viking Scandinavia, and Pharaonic Egypt, that it has for some decades been widely accepted among specialists in the field that a single mythic tradition, what Joseph Campbell called the monomyth, underlies all the discrete mythic traditions.’¹

However, in today’s secular culture, nothing is supposed to point back to the true history of the Bible, especially to the creation, the Flood or the dispersion from Babel. Indications from science and history that the Bible might be accurate are vigorously denied, particularly for the events in Genesis chapters 1–11. Thus it is claimed that the development of constellation patterns is a kind of convergent cultural evolution that happened spontaneously in many cultures. Anthony F. Aveni, for example, ignores the cross-cultural links between constellations and restricts his focus to the Pleiades, which eases the way to supposing that in a kind of ‘convergent development’, the Pleiades pattern could have arisen spontaneously in many isolated cultures. He writes,

‘Among primitive societies, the Pleiades are often the only celestial group paid any attention. In Bali, the Pleiades and Orion’s Belt are the only stars people use to correct their lunar calendar. The Pleiades are also worshipped among aboriginal people who do not practice agriculture. This may be due to the coincidence of the first annual appearance of the group at the beginning of the rainy season. Developing civilizations could hardly fail to observe that wild fruits grew more plentifully and therefore that they would have more to eat after a heavy fall of rain than after a long drought. Hunters could learn of the migration of their prey as a function of the meteorological cycle. It would then be but a simple step to attribute the cause of certain terrestrial occurrences to these stars. Indeed, many of the aboriginal people of Australia regard the Pleiades not merely as a signal but instead as the cause of rain—an astrological rather than an astronomical function. They curse the Pleiades if their appearance in the sky is not immediately followed by a rainy period.’²

Aveni’s view is simplistic. Though no two cultures share constellations identical in every detail, nevertheless there are deep and basic similarities that have attracted the attention of secular researchers who give no credence to Genesis 1–11. Emphasizing the differences cannot erase the similarities, and these similarities are too wide-ranging to be due to coincidence alone. Therefore it is plausible to claim that ‘most cultures recognize more or less the same constellations.’³ The truth is that the constellations trace back to a time consistent with the chronology of Nimrod’s life, were arguably common knowledge at Babel, and have since been preserved among the world’s cultures.⁴

When did the constellations originate?

Using the spread of Western culture and missions to account for the cross-cultural similarity of constellations overlooks the existence of similarities in ancient constellations. As we will see, similarities in ancient constellations are a difficulty for conventional views of the past. On the other hand, having similarities among ancient constellations does not mean that ancient cultures had identical constellations. Biblical creationists have recognized these similarities as being connected with the dispersion from Babel.⁵
Even more, the existence of any similarity at all is damaging to the belief that isolated groups of primitive peoples evolved in different localities. In fact the constellations have no objective existence. The patterns that we call constellations are in the minds of the beholders, for the stars comprising them, with few exceptions, do not lie on the same plane in space. The stars that seem to be situated on the surface of the ‘celestial sphere’ are actually at various distances from us. This may be obvious to astronomers and other scientists, but laypeople are often unaware of the fact that

‘The stars of a constellation have no connection one with another apart from the fact that they happen to lie in approximately similar directions as seen from earth. A constellation is therefore an arbitrary or conventional grouping of stars. Indeed, the Chinese, for example, divided the sky up into groups different from those familiar to us.’⁶

Image from

Figure 2. An illustration from Camille Flammarion’s 1880 Astronomie Populaire.

With the thousands of stars visible to the naked eye, the probability of independently evolving cultures arriving at the same constellations by chance alone is remote. There is no evolutionary approach that explains how different cultures, supposedly developing in separate parts of the world, managed to imagine the same or similar star patterns in the sky. Conversely, the existence of even a few identical constellations suggests that all of mankind was once congregated at one point from which all ethnic groups dispersed.
Since the Bible describes such a dispersion scenario, at least some of the constellation similarities among ancient cultures represented shared ideas originating before mankind dispersed. While some post-dispersion borrowing may have occurred among adjacent cultures, borrowing cannot account for the existence of similarities between ancient Old and New World cultures now separated by the ocean. Even secular authorities place the origin of constellations at a time consistent with the biblical date for Babel. Astronomer and historian of science James Jeans wrote:

‘The earth wobbles as it rotates … so that the portion of the sky which can be seen from any portion of the earth’s surface is continually changing; that part in which the constellations bear ancient names is the part which could be seen from about latitude 40° N., in about the year 2750 BC, and this is thought to suggest that these constellations were grouped and named by the Babylonians of some such date. They are practically identical with our present-day constellations of the northern sky.’⁷

The biblical date for Babel is about 2300–2400 BC,⁸ comparable with the 2750 date that Jeans cited.
Jeans’ assessment was not new. In 1913, one writer noted that ‘[According to Maunder] there was a tradition that Taurus was the original leader in the zodiac; the equinox, therefore, was probably in Taurus when the constellations of the zodiac were formed, and this was the case between 4000 and 1700 BC’⁹ Maunder himself claimed that ‘the [celestial] sphere was mapped out in North latitude 40° and about 2800 years BC’¹⁰

This range of dates, especially the lower end, is consistent with a tight biblical chronology without ‘gaps’ which places the dispersion from Babel around 2300 BC.

Astronomer Michael Ovenden later confirmed a similar date of origin for the constellations. He ‘found the mean of the different dates from the various constellations to be 2800 BC ± 300 years … . There can … be no doubt that the constellations are, individually, oriented symmetrically with respect to the celestial poles of about 2800 BC’¹¹ More recently, astronomer William K. Hartmann concluded that the constellations as we know them date from sometime between 2600 ± 800 BC: ‘Many constellations may be Minoan … handed down to us from around 2600 BC, with still earlier elements incorporated into them. We should not assume that “it all started with the Greeks”.’¹²
Much of this range of dates, especially the lower end, is consistent with a tight biblical chronology without ‘gaps’ which places the dispersion from Babel around 2300 BC. Further, Hartmann is not saying that the constellations began with the Minoans, but that they continued the use of ‘earlier elements.’ This blending of ‘earlier elements’ into new cultural frameworks explains the modifications which became the differences now commonly taken as proof that the constellations were not shared among the early (post-Babel) cultures. Along this line, Evershed proposed that the Assyrians imposed major modifications on the original constellations:

‘Is it not possible that in the golden age of Assyrian astronomy, which began in the 8th century BC, many traditional forms were gathered together, and the whole sphere definitely mapped out; while at the same time, in the new calendar which was introduced under Nabonassar, the first month for the first time connected with the invisible group of Aries, in which the Sun was known to be, instead of with the group Taurus which appeared after his [the sun’s] setting in the west?’¹³

However, the Assyrians cannot be considered the originators of the constellations, even though this has been claimed. B.E. Schaefer, wrote,

‘I have found 172 useful constraints for Eudoxus’ lore [leading to the following conclusion]. … (1) All lore reported by Eudoxus were based on observations from the year 1130 ± 80 BC and at a latitude of 36.0 ± 0.9 degrees north. (2) My derived date and latitude correspond only to the peak of the Assyrian culture. (3) The typical accuracy of the lore is 4–8 degrees even though 1 degree accuracy is easy to be gotten by primitive methods. (4) About half the rise/set pairs [of recorded star positions] recorded in the Mesopotamian MUL.APIN tablets are also given in Eudoxus’ lore. (5) The

‘MUL.APIN tablets have been independently determined to be based on observations from roughly 1000 BC at a latitude of 36 degrees north … I conclude that both Eudoxus’ lore and MUL.APIN were derived from the same old Assyrian observations.’¹⁴

The low accuracy Schaefer perceives for the latitude of the lore also implies a low accuracy in the time inferred from the lore. Having focused on the MUL.APIN tablets as supplying the time frame for the lore, Schaefer inferred the latitude necessary from the lore to give him the time frame he expected, then concluded that the time frame matched the time of Assyria’s cultural dominance. His conclusion that the MUL.APIN tablets and Eudoxus derive from the same source is true, except that the ultimate source dates from c. 2800 BC (a date which should be revised downward by several centuries, as noted below), so could not have been Assyria. Nor could the Romans via Ptolemy have given us the constellations, for ‘Ptolemy’s catalogue bears witness to a constellation scheme that originated and had received its completion before his day.’¹⁵
Even the common belief that the constellations as we know them originated with the Greeks cannot be true.

‘[The Greek naturalist] Hipparchus was not the originator of the constellations. He had before him the description of the sky known as ‘The Sphere of Eudoxus’ (Eudoxus of Cnidos, c. 403–350 BC), and a poetic description of the sphere of Eudoxus given by Aratus (c. 315–250 BC) in the work known as the Phaenomenon. If [2800 BC for] the date of the constellations is correct, then Aratus and Hipparchus lie about half-way between us and the constellation-makers, and Hipparchus will be trying to fit what he sees with descriptions in the sphere of Eudoxus that are really appropriate to a situation 2500 years before his time.’¹⁶

Maunder likewise observed, ‘the correspondence between the Greek and Indian planispheres [sky maps] shows that one of them was copied from the other, or both from the same original model.’¹⁷

Constellation similarities are not coincidence

A number of historians have asserted that the very earliest cultures, those we would recognize as early post-dispersion peoples, did in fact employ the same constellations. Differences developed, but similarities remained. For example, historian Kenneth Brecher pointed out that

‘The Babylonians identify [Sirius] as part of a constellation which they describe as a bow and arrow. The Chinese independently described a bow and arrow in the sky, but they used different stars for their construction. For them, Sirius is part of the image at which the arrow is shooting; and curiously, the image at which that arrow is shooting is a dog. In Western tradition, Sirius is part of the constellation Canis Major, the Big Dog. It is remarkable that the same images—dogs, bows and arrows—occur in the cosmographies of different cultures; after all, if you look at the sky, you see only points of light on a dark field. … [This can be taken] as an indication that the astronomical myths of China and Mesopotamia derive from a common origin.’¹⁸

Historians Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend have also noted that the Orion motif is ‘common to the spheres of Mesopotamia, Egypt and China.’ Further, ‘there is strong circumstantial evidence of this bow and arrow in Mexico also: the bow of the Chichimeca, the Dog-people.’¹⁹ Orion with modifications was also recognized in ancient Iran and India,²⁰ but modification is what one would expect for diffusing legends. Orion was also familiar to the ancient Norwegians,²¹ and Old Norse rock art depicted Orion.²²
The Pleiades were another constellation known worldwide in ancient times, even among Australian aborigines: ‘In Aboriginal mythology there are many stories of the Pleiades: they are given female attributes and are known as seven sisters. In this there is a pronounced similarity to legends from all over the world.’²³ But the Pleiades’ renown is not due to their prominence in the heavens: ‘Those stars are apparently only six’, with the seventh so dim at times so as to be unseen,

‘ … yet all the world over, among civilized and savage races, in Europe, in India, China, Japan, America, and Africa, this diminutive group is not merely regarded as seven stars, but what is still more surprising, as “The Seven Stars,” though the far brighter seven stars of the Great Bear might seem to deserve the title.’²⁴

The Great Bear was also known worldwide in antiquity: ‘The star group in Ursa Major was seen as a bear in Europe, Asia, North America, and even ancient Egypt, where there are no bears … the bear identification may go all the way back to ice-age Euro-Asia, from where it spread.’²⁵ Significantly, ‘ice-age Euro-Asia’ would have been the location of Babel, and would have existed at the time indicated by biblical chronology for Babel.
As mentioned earlier, Maunder estimated that the latitude of the constellation makers was 40° north. A more recent investigation placed the latitude slightly farther south, at approximately 30° to 38° north.²⁶
The latitude of Babylon, 32½° north, is within this range.²⁷ A significant fact about the constellations is that the oldest ones fill only the northern sky and are absent in an empty zone surrounding the south celestial pole.^25,28 This is consistent with the existence of Babel in the northern hemisphere,¹³ together with the fact that dispersing cultures did not reach the extremities of the southern hemisphere until relatively recently. In contradiction, however, Ovenden asserted,

‘There are four main contenders for the title of constellation-makers. The credit is often given to the Babylonians, but their seafaring would have been in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, too far south for the latitude of the constellation makers [but Babel slightly south of Baghdad was at about 32° north, close to Ovenden’s estimated latitude range for these people]. The Egyptians sailed in the Mediterranean, but much of their seafaring also would have been in more southern waters. The Phoenicians were great traders, with a great centre at Byblus, latitude about 34° (consistent with our determined latitude). … But I would like to put forward the claims of the Minoans, based on Crete, who were out in the Mediterranean in strength by the beginning of the third millennium BC’²⁹

Hartmann’s reservation about naming the Minoans as the constellation-makers has been mentioned. Further, Ovenden’s proposals have a chronological problem. The chronologies of his four candidates—and of other ancient chronologies tied to conventional Egyptian chronology—are too long by as much as a millennium.³⁰ Once the chronologies are scaled down, as they ought to be, by shrinking the Egyptian chronology appropriately, and by subtracting out the years of the non-existent ‘dark ages’ from the Minoan and Greek chronologies, these cultures date not from c. 2500 BC, but from closer to 1500 BC, a date roughly a millennium too young to match the date of the constellation-makers.

The constellations: remembrance of Noah’s Flood?

There is a view that God mapped out the constellations as a kind of primeval revelation before man had the Bible.³¹ An even older view of the constellations is that they were a device of Nimrod at Babel to lead mankind away from God, or at least they reflect the corrupted mythologies that mankind fell into at Babel and afterward.³² In between these extreme views is a middle view that constellations are corrupted memories of significant events happening early in history. The most traumatic such event was the global Flood of Noah, and—as Glasglow University astrophysicist and historian of science Michael Ovenden observed—one of the most expansive constellations is

‘ … the large constellation of Arago the Ship, often shown in early representations [of the constellations] as though atop a mountain. Coming from the ship is the Centaur, a man-animal, sacrificing a Beast upon the Altar. We see, too, the Water-snake (Hydra) with a Raven (Corvus) eating its flesh. There can be no doubt that here we have, in imagination pictured in the sky, a version of the story of Noah and the Flood. The picture is complete with the Milky Way seeming to rise as smoke from the Altar.

‘Consider the following quotation, with which we are all familiar: “And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord, and took of every clean beast and of every clean fowl and offered burnt offerings at the altar. … And God said, ‘This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you for perpetual generations. I do set my bow in a cloud, and it shall be a token of a covenant between me and the Earth’.” The bow of Sagittarius is fixed pointing to one of the most obvious rifts, or clouds, in the Milky Way. Of course, this association of the Southern constellations with the flood story that occurs in Genesis, and in the Babylonian Book of Gilgamesh, is no new insight, for when the stars left vacant by changing the course of Eridanus [due to precession] were later given a name, Columba the Dove was chosen [i.e. the “Dove” motif was preserved even as the star patterns in the heavens changed over the centuries because of precession]. …

‘Did the constellations inspire the myth [of the Flood] or did the myth inspire the constellations? I am sure that the latter was the case. Indeed, what better aid to memory of the pattern of the stars by uneducated sailors could there be than to associate the star-patterns with the stories known to the sailors from their childhood, as a pictorial mnemonic.’³³

It appears that Ovenden’s assessment has support from other quarters, for Arago is not the only stellar reminder of the Flood. ‘from the Lake Eyre region [Australia] there is a myth that links [the Pleiades, known as the Seven Sisters] with a flood’.³⁴ In this myth, ‘the ancestor figure who tried to capture one of them was prevented by a great flood.’³⁵ By association with the Flood, the Pleiades became associated with the giving of rain, even though the aborigines were not farmers and therefore had no practical reason to monitor rainfall.

‘[Primitive peoples] have commonly timed the various operations of the agricultural year by observation of [the Pleiades’] heliacal rising or setting. … great attention has been paid to the Pleiades by savages in the southern hemisphere who do not till the ground. … Now amongst the rudest of savages known to us are the Australian aborigines, none of whom in their native state ever practised agriculture. [Yet they] sing and dance to gain the favour of the Pleiades … the constellation worshipped … as the giver of rain.’³⁶

There is also a Jewish legend that links the Pleiades with the Flood: ‘The upper waters rushed through the space left when God removed two stars out of the constellation Pleiades.’³⁷ How the Pleiades became connected with the Flood is not known. Nevertheless, the Pleiades are another component of legends worldwide that testify to the reality of Noah’s Flood.

Is the Gospel in the stars?

Table 1. Constellations and asterisms in the Bible.

The gospel-in-the-stars concept is the idea that God originally defined the constellations as a primeval revelation preceding the giving of the written Word. The constellations were intended to tell the Gospel story, but eventually the meaning of the constellations was corrupted into astrology; now we have God’s revelation in His Word, a ‘more sure word of prophecy’ (2 Peter 1:19).
Though God made the stars (Genesis 1:16), and though the Bible mentions various constellations and groups of stars called ‘asterisms’, e.g. the Pleiades (see table 1³⁸), the Bible nowhere claims that God designed the constellations for a revelatory purpose. Biblical references to constellations merely assert that God, not pagan deities, controls the stars in the constellations. Biblical references to constellations are therefore a rebuttal of ancient and modern astrology, not proof of a ‘gospel in the stars’.
In fact God has a name for each star: ‘He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names’ (Psalm 147:4). Isaiah 40:26 links God’s ability to create and name each star with His ability to control them: ‘Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names of the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.’ Isaiah 40:26 is a strong assertion that God controls the heavens, which means that God, not the heavens, controls our lives. This assertion remains relevant today, for astrology was and still is a common belief. In antiquity,

‘ … astrology was based on the doctrine that the outer spheres of the universe influenced the inner. … This conception coloured all departments of thought and embedded itself deeply in speech. “The scheme was conceived under an evil star”, “His fortune is in the ascendant”, “The seventh heaven of delight”, “He has gone to a higher sphere”, “The British sphere of influence”, “Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades” (Job XXXViii. 31), “He has the influenza” are such cases.’³⁹

Figure 3. Title page of Rolleston’s Mazzaroth, the origin of the modern ‘gospel-in-the-stars’ concept.

Modern belief in the constellations as Gospel revelation began with the publication of Mazzaroth: or, the Constellations by Frances Rolleston (figure 3).⁴⁰ Rolleston cited ‘proof texts’ without context but in so doing made an argument which became popular. Rolleston’s assertion was that ‘the signs [in the zodiac] were intended to symbolize prophecy, as recorded in the Holy Scriptures.’⁴¹
Subsequent books teaching a Gospel in the stars trace back to Rolleston’s Mazzaroth. For example, Joseph R. Seiss in The Gospel in the Starsacknowledged: that ‘from [Rolleston’s] tables and references the writer of these Lectures was helped to some of his best information.’⁴² E.W. Bullinger in The Witness of the Stars likewise described his debt to Rolleston: ‘Some years ago it was my privilege to enjoy the acquaintance of Miss Frances Rolleston, of Keswick, and to carry on a correspondence with her with respect to her work, Mazzaroth: or, the Constellations. She was the first to create an interest in this important subject.’⁴³ Kenneth C. Fleming in God’s Voice in the Stars cited Rolleston, Seiss, and Bullinger in a conceptual lineage spanning more than a century,⁴⁴ as did Henry M. Morris⁴⁵ and Ruth Beechick.⁴⁶
Christians gravitated to Rolleston’s argument because it seemed to lend historical veracity to the early chapters of Genesis. But similarities among the constellations provide intriguing evidence of biblical history without the need of resorting to Rolleston’s ‘gospel in the stars’ idea. Indeed, Rolleston and Seiss advanced the claim of this present paper, that constellations of diverse cultures show basic similarities, implying that humanity once lived at a single site. Rolleston, for example, noted that ‘the Egyptian and Chaldean signs were the same as everywhere else, but differently named.’⁴⁷
Seiss maintained that he came to the gospel-in-the-stars concept by encountering sceptical polemical works attempting ‘to throw contempt on Christianity as a mere accommodation of certain old mythic ideas common to all primitive peoples’, but rather than doubting Christianity, Seiss began noticing the ‘striking correspondence between [the ancient myths] and the subsequent Scriptural story of Christ and salvation.’⁴⁸
The skeptics had exploited the cultural similarities among the constellations as evidence that Christian beliefs were merely primitive archetypes. With input from Rolleston, Seiss in turn interpreted these archetypes as evidence that the stars carried an ancient Gospel message visible to all. However, the remembrance, in legendary form, of historical events such as the Flood also accounts for these so-called ‘archetypes’. Images of these ‘archetypes’ were indeed imposed on star patterns. That is the claim of this paper. Thus the similarities in constellations reflect the reality of historical events affecting all mankind rather than a supposed prophecy in the stars.
Was there ever a need for a Gospel in the stars? A careful reading of the Bible suggests not, for even among the ante-diluvians Enoch (Genesis 5:21–24) ‘prophesied … saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints’ (Jude 14–15). And long before this, Genesis 3:15—the so-called ‘proto-evangelium’—records that God, speaking to Adam and Eve, had prophesied the coming of His Son to Earth. Gospel-in-the-stars advocates associates constellations with the biblical statement in Genesis 1:14–18 that God created stars for ‘signs’, but these verses mention only stars, not constellations. Seeing constellations in Genesis 1:14–18 is a kind of eisegesis, the reading in of a concept not mentioned in the passage but present in the mind of the reader.

Table 2. Names of the 24 brightest stars according to Fleming.⁴⁴
References for Table 2. (1) Fleming,⁴⁴ pp. 21–22. (2) Pages cited in Allen.²¹ (3) In Fleming⁴⁴ (p. 21), Rigil Kentaurus is Toliman. (4) Vega and Capella are actually 5th and 6th; Arcturus is 4th.⁵⁰ (5) Altair is actually 12th, after Betelgeuse and Hadar.⁵⁰ (6) In Fleming (p. 21), Hadar is Agena. (7) A-crux is actually 24th.⁵⁰ (8) Aldebaran, 14th, is actually preceded by HD 213468,⁵⁰ not listed in Fleming.⁴⁴ (9) Pollux, Spica and Anteres are actually 17th, 15th and 16th, respectively.⁵⁰ (10) Regulus is actually 21st and Mimosa is 20th.⁵⁰ (11) In Fleming⁴⁴ (p. 22), Mimosa is B-crux. (12) Castor is actually 25th, Alioth 33rd, and Bellatrix 28th.⁵⁰

Gospel-in-the-stars advocates also infer from star names that the stars individually must have been primeval revelation. Some of the brightest stars, for example, have names reminiscent of biblical themes⁴⁹ (see table 2). However, the Bible nowhere reveals the name that God has given to each star, so there is no guarantee that the traditional star names preserve elements of divine nomenclature. Mankind’s ancient awareness of special revelation as mentioned in Genesis 3:15 and Jude 14–15, along with mankind’s memories of ancient historical ‘archetypes’, however, explains the similarity between star names and biblical themes.
Further, the primeval meaning of many star names is uncertain at best; ‘“etymology has full play with a word which has not traveled beyond astronomical language”—a statement … applicable to very many … star names.’²¹ By stretching uncertain meanings, the appearance of agreement can be produced between the supposed ancient meanings and biblical themes. In addition, the errors in Fleming’s list of star brightness order, noted at the bottom of table 2, do not add credibility to the supposed ‘revelatory’ significance he attributed to each star name.

Conclusions

The cultures of today emanated from a single point which the Bible identifies as Babel. Constellation similarities are an evidence of this fact.

The cultures of today emanated from a single point which the Bible identifies as Babel. Constellation similarities are an evidence of this fact. The question has been asked, ‘is there not a good deal of evidence to show that the constellations grew up gradually in Babylonia, and approximated more and more nearly to those we know as time approached the age of Greek astronomy?’¹³ The answer appears to be yes.
This conclusion falsifies the claim that the constellations were a kind of primeval Gospel revelation. It strengthens the realization that God has always given special revelation to mankind though His chosen prophets and His written Word, this last being the exclusive source of special revelation since the close of the apostolic age.

Acknowledgments

The crucial assistance of Mr Michael Clater, head librarian at Clearwater Christian College, in locating original versions of the old documents cited herein is gratefully acknowledged.

• Astronomy And The Bible
• Astronomy and Astrophysics Questions and Answers
• Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic

Further Reading

• Astronomy And The Bible
• Astronomy and Astrophysics Questions and Answers
• Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic

References

1. Murray, C., Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 BC to 1950, HarperCollins, New York, pp. 21–22, 2003. Return to text.
2. Aveni, A.F., Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico, University of Texas, Austin, TX, pp. 30–31, 1989. Return to text.
3. Henry, J.F., The Astronomy Book, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 1999, pp. 24–25. Return to text.
4. There has long been the idea that God defined the constellations as a pre-biblical revelation, a so-called ‘gospel in the stars’. See in the text the section, ‘Is the Gospel in the stars?’ Return to text.
5. Morris, H.M., The Genesis Record, Institute for Creation Research, San Diego, CA, p. 278, 1976. Return to text.
6. Ovenden, M.W., The origin of constellations, The Philosophical Journal 3:1–18, July 1966; p. 1. An exception is the three stars in Orion’s belt (Levy, D.H. and Betelgeuse, J.P., Astronomy15(4):7–13, April 1987. Orion’s belt has the three bright stars zeta Orionis (Alnitak), epsilon Orionis (Alnilam), and delta Orionis (Mintaka). These three stars are at the same distance from earth (1,500 light-years), so they lie in the very plane in which they appear to be situated. Perhaps that is why, in Job 38:31, God asks Job, ‘Canst thou … loose the bands of Orion?’ in an apparent allusion to His ability to maintain the placement of the Pleiades’ stars in space. These three stars are also remarkably similar in other ways (the same size, about 20 times larger than the sun; and similar surface temperatures, about 50,000 ºC or somewhat higher). Return to text.
7. Jeans, J., The Story of Physical Science, Cambridge University, Cambridge, England, p. 8, 1951. Return to text.
8. Morris, ref. 5, p. 675. Return to text.
9. Evershed, M.A., The origin of the constellations, Observatory36:179–181, April 1913; p. 179. Return to text.
10. Maunder, E.W., The zodiac explained, Observatory21:441, December 1898. Return to text.
11. Ovenden, ref. 6, p. 6. Return to text.
12. Hartmann, W.K., Astronomy, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, p. 15, 1991. Return to text.
13. Evershed, ref. 9, p. 181. Return to text.
14. Schaefer, B.E., The latitude and epoch for the origin of the astronomical lore of Eudoxus, American Astronomical Society Meeting203, #35.01, December 2003; , 8 July 2004. Return to text.
15. Maunder, E.W., The origin of the constellations, Observatory36:330, April 1913. Return to text.
16. Ovenden, ref. 6, p. 8. Return to text.
17. Maunder, ref 10, p. 439. Return to text.
18. Brecher, K., Sirius Enigmas; in: Brecher, K. and Feirtag, M. (Eds.), Astronomy of the Ancients, MIT, Cambridge, MA, p. 91, 1979. Return to text.
19. de Santillana, G. and von Dechend, H., Hamlet’s Mill, Gambit, Boston, MA, p. 216, 1969. Return to text.
20. de Santillana and von Dechend, re. 19, p. 358. Return to text.
21. Allen, R.H., Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning, Dover, New York, p. 313, 1963; originally published as Star-Names and Their Meanings, G.E. Stechert, New York, 1899. Return to text.
22. Schoemfeld, M., Prehistoric astronomy: a zodiac from bohusian province, Norway, Scientific American 3:301–303, 1921. Return to text.
23. Aitchison, J.E., The Pleiades in Aboriginal Mythology, SIS Workshop 5, September 1983; in: Tresman, I. (Ed.), Catastrophism!: Man, Myth and Mayhem in Ancient History and the Sciences, CD–ROM version 1.41, (33 Reginald Street, Derby DE23 8FR, UK, Knowledge Computing, May 2004). The Nazca Indians of Peru recognized the Pleiades. Hadingham, E., Lines to the Mountain Gods, University of Oklahoma, Norman, p. 104, 1988. Return to text.
24. Haliburton, R.G., Primitive traditions as to the Pleiades, Nature 25:100–101, 1 December 1881; p. 100. Return to text.
25. Hartmann, ref. 12, p. 14. Return to text.
26. ‘… if we take the date to be 2800 BC ± 300 years, the observers’ latitude becomes 34° ± 4° … [On the other hand, a statistical analysis of star positions inferred from various statements in Aratus yields an estimate for the date and latitude of] 2600 BC ± 800 years, 36°N ± 1½°’ (Ovenden, ref. 6, pp. 11, 12). Return to text.
27. Pannekoek, A., A History of Astronomy, Allen and Unwin, London, 1961, p. 74; reprinted Dover, Mineola, New York, 1989. Return to text.
28. Gingerich, O., On the origin of the zodiac, Sky & Telescope 67:218–220, March 1984; p. 218. Return to text.
29. Ovenden, ref. 6, p. 15. Return to text.
30. Henry, J.F., Fallacies of radiometric dating, Appendix A, The Sothic Cycle and Egyptian chronology, 2007, , accessed 30 August 2008. Return to text.
31. See the section, ‘Is the Gospel in the stars?’ Return to text.
32. Hislop, A., The Two Babylons: or the Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife, Loizeaux Brothers, Neptune, NJ, p. 13, 1959. Hislop began this work in 1853 in the form of a pamphlet; it was first published as a book in 1919. See ‘The Two Babylons’ (, April 24, 2007). Ralph Woodrow, in Babylon Mystery Religion (Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Palm Springs, CA, 1966), once advocated Hislop’s ideas. But in The Babylonian Connection? (Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Palm Springs, CA, 1997), pp. 23–28, Woodrow claimed some of Hislop’s conclusions to be undocumented speculation. However, one should not swing from Hislop’s assertion that nearly all cultural practices began at Babel to the opposite claim that virtually nothing began at Babel (Woodrow, 1997, p. 24). In fact, History Begins at Sumer is the title of a book by historian Samuel Noah Kramer (Doubleday Anchor, Garden City, NY, 1959). Sumer was the biblical Shinar (Genesis 11:1), the location of Babel, and the centre of the first civilization after the Flood. Kramer asserted that many cultural practices and patterns did in fact first appear in the Sumer of 2800 BC (p. 29). Return to text.
33. Ovenden, ref. 6, pp. 16–17. Return to text.
34. Aitchison, ref. 23. Return to text.
35. Isaacs, J. (Ed.), Australian Dreaming, Aboriginal Arts Board and Lansdowne Press, Sydney, Australia, p. 152, 1980. Return to text.
36. Frazier, J.G., The Golden Bough, Part 5, Spirits of the Corn and of the Wild vol. 1, Macmillan, London, p. 313, 1920. Return to text.
37. Ginzberg, L., Szold, H. (tr.), Legends of the Jews vol. 1, Jewish Publication Society of America, Phildelphia, PA, p. 162, 1968; reprint of 1909 edition. Return to text.
38. Allen, ref. 21, p. 554. Return to text.
39. Singer, C., A Short History of Scientific Ideas to 1900, Oxford University, New York, p. 215, 1959. Return to text.
40. Rolleston, F., Mazzoroth, or, the Constellations, Rivingtons, London, 1862, ), reprinted 1882. Return to text.
41. Rolleston, ref. 40, part 1, p. 7. Return to text.
42. Seiss, J.R., The Gospel in the Stars, E. Claxton, Philadelphia, p. 6, 1882; reprinted Kregel, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1972. Return to text.
43. Bullinger, E.W., The Witness of the Stars, Lamp Press, London, p. iii, 1954. Return to text.
44. Fleming, K.C., God’s Voice in the Stars, Loizeaux Brothers, Neptune, NJ, p. 143, 1981. Return to text.
45. Morris, H.M, Many Infallible Proofs, Creation-Life, San Diego, CA, p. 343, 1974. Return to text.
46. Beechick, R., Adam and His Kin, Arrow Press, Pollock Pines, CA, pp. 50–53, 172, 175, 1990. Return to text.
47. Rolleston, ref. 40, part 2, p. 7. Return to text.
48. Seiss, ref. 42, p. 6. Return to text.
49. Fleming, ref. 44, pp. 21–22. Return to text.
50. Kornberg, C., The Brightest Stars, 9 November 1998, . Return to text.

Noah and Herakles (Nimrod)

Re our post:

Herakles (Nimrod) Threatens Nereus (Noah)
 

http://westerncivilisationamaic.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/herakles-nimrod-threatens-nereus-noah.html
 

John R. Salverda has commented:
 

Dear Damien,

Here is a remark on the Noah and Nimrod as Nereus and Herakles post, it was too long for a regular comment:

OK, there may have been some "Nimrod" in Herakles. There was certainly some Gilgamesh in him. "The story of Heracles was an early variant of the Babylonian Gilgamesh epic which reached Greece by way of Phoenicia. Gilgamesh has Enkidu for his beloved comrade, Heracles has Iolaus. Gilgamesh is undone by his love for the goddess Ishtar, Heracles by his love for Deianeira. Both are of divine parentage. Both harrow Hell. Both kill lions and overcome divine bulls; and when sailing to the Western Isle Heracles, like Gilgamesh, uses his garment for a sail. Heracles finds the magic herb of immortality as Gilgamesh does, and is similarly connected with the progress of the sun around the Zodiac." (the quote is from Robert Graves "The Greek Myths"). And I'm certainly not opposed to connecting Nereus with Noah. Many ancient "sea gods" can probably be traced back to Noah. Including the Philistine god Dagon, a form of Enki. Which leads me back to the old standby identification with Herakles, Samson. The Philistine fish god was the famous nemesis of Samson, and this enmity is, in my view, also a very likely origin for the icon of Heracles confronting the Merman. Furthermore, many of the enemies of Heracles are characterized as the "son of Poseidon" another famous god of the sea and likely candidate for identification with Dagon.

The story of the death of Samson, seems to occur in the Greek myth of Heracles, in more than one place. Samson, of course, was led a captive to the temple of Dagon where he pushed apart the pillars, killing all who were present. Heracles has the story of Busiris, a son of Poseidon, who tries to offer him up in a temple Herakles summons up his strength and kills the thousands who were there as attendees. Herodotus tells us - which he himself did not believe possible; “The Greeks tell many tales without due investigation, and among them the following silly fable respecting Hercules:- Hercules, they say, went once to Egypt, and there the inhabitants took him, and putting a chaplet on his head, led him out in solemn procession, intending to offer him as a sacrifice to Zeus. For a while he submitted quietly; but when they led him up to the altar and began the ceremonies, he put forth his strength and slew them all. ... Besides this, how is it in nature possible that Heracles, being one person only and moreover a man (as they assert), should slay many myriads?" (“Histories” Book II, p. 45). In this story the land of "Egypt" is plausibly a corruption for the land of "Jacob" and Heracles is Samson.

The story of pushing upon the pillars was also known to the Greeks as a story of Hercules; "But since we have mentioned the pillars of Heracles, we deem it to be appropriate to set forth the facts concerning them. When Heracles arrived at the farthest points of the continents of Libya and Europe which lie upon the ocean, he decided to set up these pillars to commemorate his campaign. And since he wished to leave upon the ocean a monument which would be had in everlasting remembrance, he built out both the promontories, they say, to a great distance; consequently, whereas before that time a great space had stood between them, he now narrowed the passage, in order that by making it shallow and narrow he might prevent the great sea-monsters from passing out of the ocean into the inner sea, and that at the same time the fame of their builder might be held in everlasting remembrance by reason of the magnitude of the structures. Some authorities, however, say just the opposite, namely, that the two continents were originally joined and that he cult a passage between them, and that by opening the passage he brought it about that the ocean was mingled with our sea. On this question, however, it will be possible for every man to think as he may please." (Diodorus Siculus, "Library of History" 4. 18. 4,5). Notice how Diodorus gives Herakles the motivation of protecting us from sea-monsters (again Dagon?) in his manipulation of the pillars.

For all the images of Heracles vs. Nereus, there is very little story about it. But, of what story there is, I must admit that it is very reminiscent of the story of Gilgamesh; "Herakles took hold of him as he lay sleeping, and bound him fast as Nereus changed himself into all sorts of shapes; he did not let him loose until Nereus told him where the apples and the Hesperides were." (Apollodorus, The Library 2. 114). Take note that Herakles like Gilgamesh confronts Nereus as Ut-Napishtim in order to find a way to Hesperidies as Eden.

Now, I do realize that there is a large school of thought that identifies Gilgamesh with Nimrod. However, I am unaware of any legends in which Nimrod confronted Noah.
 

-John R. Salverda

Herakles (Nimrod) Threatens Nereus (Noah)

Taken from: http://www.theparthenoncode.com/features/37NoahsPartIII.htm

....

HERAKLES/NIMROD THREATENS NEREUS/NOAH, BRINGS HIS RULE TO A HALT, AND PUSHES HIM OUT OF THE WAY
PLUS: WHAT THE REBEL HERAKLES—NIMROD—GILGAMESH IS AFTER, AND WHAT HE FEARS

---

Now we’re going to take a look at how Greek vase-painters pitted Herakles/Nimrod against Nereus/Noah in various scenes to depict the takeover of Zeus-religion—the Greeks’ contrary, man-centered religious outlook.

In the above scene, Herakles/Nimrod threatens Nereus/Noah with his club. It’s as if Herakles is saying, “Stay out of the way, Noah, or you’ll get some of this.” Note the serpent attached to Herakles’ belt in the back. The desire to get back to the serpent’s enlightenment is literally “behind” what is going on here.

In the above vase-scene, Nereus/Noah is headed somewhere, but Herakles/Nimrod, who leads the rebellion against his rule, surprises him from behind, making him turn his head. Herakles is literally “strong-arming” Nereus/Noah. Herakles grabs the wrist that holds the scepter, because that is what this is about: taking Noah’s authority and putting a stop to his rule.

In this larger view of the same vase-scene, it looks as if Herakles/Nimrod is saying to Noah as he grabs him from behind, “Hey, where do you think you’re going? It’s over for you. I’m in charge now.”

The scene on this black-figure cup expresses the same theme in a different way. Herakles/Nimrod comes from behind Nereus/Noah and brings his momentum to a halt. Notice how Herakles/Nimrod is leaning back and using his feet for brakes. He’s putting a stop to Noah’s rule. Poseidon, a “brother” of Zeus, advances. He will take over—as Nereus/Noah is stopped and pushed out of the picture. Note that Poseidon now has the trident, once an attribute of Nereus/Noah.

Here we see Nereus/Noah depicted as an old man carrying a trident, a symbol usurped by Poseidon, a “brother” of Zeus and son-in-law of Nereus (Poseidon married his daughter, Amphitrite) who replaced Nereus/Noah as Zeus-religion grew.

This polychrome relief from a small altar again carries the message that Herakles/Nimrod is bringing the momentum of Nereus/Noah to a stop. Herakles comes from behind and grabs Noah by his hair, figuratively bringing Noah and his rule to a halt.

In this scene, Herakles ushers an unresisting Nereus/Noah out of the way. Note again the serpent coiled into Herakles’ belt.

In this similar scene by a different artist, Herakles again pushes an unresisting Nereus/Noah out of the way.

In this scene, Herakles pushes Nereus/Noah out of the way, knocking loose the fish he held in his hand as a symbol of his authority as the one who brought humanity through the Flood. Herakles doesn’t care what Noah has done. His only concern is what he himself is going to do now. What does Herakles want? What is he after?

This ancient shield-band panel tells us what Herakles/Nimrod is after. On it, Noah is called “Halios Geron” meaning “The Salt-Sea Old Man.” He has a snake and a flame emanating from his head, telling us what Herakles is demanding to know—where he can find the enlightenment of the serpent.
Herakles could be saying to Noah, "You tell me where to find the enlightenment of the serpent or else!"

According to Greek “myth,” Nereus/Noah told Herakles where he could find the enlightenment of the serpent that the hero so desperately craved. That place, the serpent-entwined tree with its golden apples, symbolizing the serpent’s enlightenment, is depicted on the above vase. This is the ancient paradise called Eden in Genesis and the Garden of the Hesperides in Greek art (See Chapter 18 of TPC). The women represent the peace and pleasure of paradise. From left to right: Hygeia (Health), Chrysothemis (Golden Order), Asterope (Star Face), and Lipara (Shining Skin).

As we look further to the right in the scene, we see that Herakles has made it there. Of course, Herakles didn’t really get back to the ancient garden; it is a figurative artistic statement: the Greeks will not live under Noah and his God any longer, but will re-embrace the “enlightenment” of the ancient serpent, and live by the fruit of its tree. Zeus-religion celebrates the great change in the post-Flood religious paradigm. Noah and his God are out. The serpent and its enlightenment are back in. Humanity has decided this: man is now the measure of all things.

The eleventh and final tablet (pictured above) of the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Mespotamian hero (pictured above), tells the story of a Deluge very similar to the Genesis account of Noah’s Flood. In great fear of death and in search of the meaning of his life, Gilgamesh seeks after the one human believed to be immortal, Utnapishtim, survivor of the world-engulfing Flood. Utnapishtim is the Noah of Genesis and the Nereus of Greek religion. The hero Gilgamesh is the Nimrod of Genesis and the Herakles of Greek religion.
In Genesis 6:9, we read, "Noah is a just man." The ancient Greek poet Hesiod wrote in his Theogony, "And Sea begat Nereus, the eldest of his children, who is true and lies not: and men call him the Old Man because he is trusty and gentle and does not forget the laws of righteousness, but thinks just and kindly thoughts." Utnapishtim (ut nephis tam) in Shemitic/Hebrew means "a living beacon of righteousness."

Greek artists knew of the Epic of Gilgamesh, and they naturally expressed the hero’s fear of death and his demand for knowledge from Noah in terms of his Greek counterpart, Herakles. On the above vase, the hero clings to Nereus/Noah as he looks with dread over his shoulder at the monstrous figure, Kerberos, representing death and Herakles’s fear of it. Nereus/Noah gestures as if he is responding to the plea of Herakles/Nimrod. It appears that the vase-artist is depicting these very words of Gilgamesh from the epic: “Oh woe! What shall I do Utnapishtim? Where shall I go? The snatcher has taken hold of my flesh, in my bedroom, death dwells, and wherever I set my foot, there too is death.”

By the time Greek religion became systematized, Herakles/Nimrod/Gilgamesh had figuratively gotten back to the serpent’s enlightenment in the ancient garden, and overcome his great fear of death. On this reconstructed metope from the temple of Zeus at Olympia, we see that Herakles/Nimrod (pictured with his father, Hermes/Cush) now has Kerberos under control. There is no need for Herakles to fear death any longer: he has conquered the world on behalf of his ancestors in the way of Kain, and they have made him an immortal god as a reward for what he has done for them.
The 12 Labors of Herakles on the Temple of Zeus at Olympia chronicle and celebrate mankind's rebellion after the Flood.
CLICK HERE TO SEE THEM ALL RESTORED IN COLOR BY COMPUTER

---

PART I
37 IMAGES OF NEREUS/NOAH (OUT OF THEIR VASE AND SCULPTED CONTEXTS)
PART II
A SHORT PICTORIAL REVIEW OF WHAT GREEK RELIGIOUS ART CHRONICLES AND CELEBRATES
PART III
HERAKLES/NIMROD THREATENS NEREUS/NOAH, BRINGS HIS RULE TO A HALT, AND PUSHES HIM OUT OF THE WAY
PLUS: WHAT THE REBEL HERAKLES—NIMROD—GILGAMESH IS AFTER, AND WHAT HE FEARS
PART IV
IN A DIFFERENT ARTISTIC TRADITION, HERAKLES/NIMROD IS PICTURED AS SEIZING THE AUTHORITY OF NEREUS/NOAH
PART V
THE BEGINNINGS OF ZEUS-RELIGION: THE ZEUS-WORSHIPPER, PELEUS, ABDUCTS THETIS, A DAUGHTER OF NEREUS/NOAH
PART VI
GREEK ARTISTS MAKE NEREUS/NOAH AN UNWILLING WITNESS TO THE RISE AND TAKE-OVER OF ZEUS-RELIGION

Who Was Nimrod?



[AMAIC: According to David Livingston, Nimrod (early post-Flood) was the similarly famous character, Gilgamesh.]

 

Who Was Nimrod?
 

by Dr. David Livingston
 

"Cush was the father of Nimrod, who grew to be a mighty warrior on the earth. He was a might hunter before the LORD; that is why it is said, "Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the LORD. " The centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh in Shinar. (Genesis 10:8-10) Many consider this to be a positive, complimentary testimony about Nimrod. It is just the opposite! First, a little background study is necessary. Cultural Connections in the Ancient Near East Found at Khorsabad, this eighth century BC stone relief is identified as Gilgamesh. The best-known of ancient Mesopotamian heroes, Gilgamesh was king of Uruk in southern Mesopotamia. His story is known in the poetic Gilgamesh Epic, but there is no historical evidence for his exploits in the story. He is described as part god and part man, a great builder and warrior, and a wise man in the story. Not mentioned in the Bible, the author suggests Gilgamesh is to be identified with Biblical Nimrod in Genesis 10:8-12. Besides the stories of the Creation and Flood in the Bible, there ought to be similar stories on clay tablets found in the cultures near and around the true believers. These tablets may have a reaction, or twisted version, in their accounts of the Creation and Flood. In the post-Flood genealogical records of Genesis 10, we note that the sons of Ham were: Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan. Mizraim became the Egyptians. No one is sure where Put went to live. And it is obvious who the Canaanites were. Cush lived in the "land of Shinar," which most scholars consider to be Sumer. There they developed the first civilization after the Flood. The sons of Shem -- the Semites -- were also mixed, to some extent, with the Sumerians. We suggest that Sumerian Kish, the first city established in Mesopotamia after the Flood, took its name from the man known in the Bible as Cush. The first kingdom established after the Flood was Kish, and the name "Kish" appears often on clay tablets. The early post-Flood Sumerian king lists (not found in the Bible) say that "kingship descended from heaven to Kish" after the Flood. (The Hebrew name "Cush" was much later moved to present-day Ethiopia as migrations took place from Mesopotamia to other places.) The Sumerians, very early, developed a religio-politico state which was extremely binding on all who lived in it (except for the rulers, who were a law unto themselves). This system was to influence the Ancient Near East for over 3000 years. Other cultures which followed the Sumerian system were Accad, Babylon, Assyria, and Persia, which became the basis of Greece and Rome's system of rule. Founded by Cush, the Sumerians were very important historically and Biblically. Was "Nimrod" Godly or Evil? Nimrod started his kingdom at Babylon (Genesis 10:10). Babylon later reached its zenith under Nebuchadnezzar (sixth century BC). Pictured are mudbrick ruins of Nebuchadnezzar's city along with ancient wall lines and canals. First, what does the name Nimrod mean? It comes from the Hebrew verb marad, meaning "rebel." Adding an "n" before the "m" it becomes an infinitive construct, "Nimrod." (see Kautzsch 1910: 137 2b; also BDB 1962: 597). The meaning then is "The Rebel." Thus "Nimrod" may not be the character's name at all. It is more likely a derisive term of a type, a representative, of a system that is epitomized in rebellion against the Creator, the one true God. Rebellion began soon after the Flood as civilizations were restored. At that time this person became very prominent. In Genesis 10:8-11 we learn that "Nimrod" established a kingdom. Therefore, one would expect to find also, in the literature of the ancient Near East, a person who was a type, or example, for other people to follow. And there was. It is a well-known tale, common in Sumerian literature, of a man who fits the description. In addition to the Sumerians, the Babylonians wrote about this person; the Assyrians likewise; and the Hittites. Even in Palestine, tablets have been found with this man's name on them. He was obviously the most popular hero in the Ancient Near East. Part of Nimrod's kingdom (Genesis 10:11), Nineveh along the Tigris River continued to be a major city in ancient Assyria. Today adjacent to modern Mosul, the ruins of ancient Nineveh are centered on two mounds, the acropolis at Kuyunjik and Nebi Yunis (Arabic "Prophet Jonah"). Pictured is Sennacherib's "Palace without a rival" on Kuyunjik, constructed at the end of the seventh century BC and excavated by Henry Layard in the early 20th century. The Gilgamesh Epic The Babylonian Flood Story is told on the 11th tablet of the Gilgamesh Epic, almost 200 lines of poetry on 12 clay tablets inscribed in cuneiform script. A number of different versions of the Gilgamesh Epic have been found around the ancient Near East, most dating to the seventh century BC. The most complete version came from the library of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh. Commentators agree that the story comes from a much earlier period, not too long after the Flood as described in the story. The person we are referring to, found in extra-Biblical literature, was Gilgamesh. The first clay tablets naming him were found among the ruins of the temple library of the god Nabu (Biblical Nebo) and the palace library of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh. Many others have been found since in a number of excavations. The author of the best treatise on the Gilgamesh Epic says, The date of the composition of the Gilgamesh Epic can therefore be fixed at about 2000 BC. But the material contained on these tablets is undoubtedly much older, as we can infer from the mere fact that the epic consists of numerous originally independent episodes, which, of course, did not spring into existence at the time of the composition of our poem but must have been current long before they were compiled and woven together to form our epic (Heidel 1963: 15). Yet his arrogance, ruthlessness and depravity were a subject of grave concern for the citizens of Uruk (his kingdom). They complained to the great god Anu, and Anu instructed the goddess Aruru to create another wild ox, a double of Gilgamesh, who would challenge him and distract his mind from the warrior's daughter and the noblemen's spouse, whom it appears he would not leave in peace (Roux 1966: 114). The Epic of Gilgamesh has some very indecent sections. Alexander Heidel, first translator of the epic, had the decency to translate the vilest parts into Latin. Spieser, however, gave it to us "straight" ( Pritchard 1955: 72). With this kind of literature in the palace, who needs pornography? Gilgamesh was a vile, filthy, man. Yet the myth says of him that he was "2/3 god and 1/3 man." Gilgamesh is Nimrod Model of ancient ziggurat. How does Gilgamesh compare with "Nimrod?" Josephus says of Nimrod, Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah -- a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it were through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny -- seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence upon his own power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers (Ant. 1: iv: 2) What Josephus says here is precisely what is found in the Gilgamesh epics. Gilgamesh set up tyranny, he opposed YHVH and did his utmost to get people to forsake Him. Two of the premiere commentators on the Bible in Hebrew has this to say about Genesis 10:9, Nimrod was mighty in hunting, and that in opposition to YHVH; not "before YHVH" in the sense of according to the will and purpose of YHVH, still less, . . . in a simply superlative sense . . . The name itself, "Nimrod" from marad, "we will revolt," points to some violent resistance to God . . . Nimrod as a mighty hunter founded a powerful kingdom; and the founding of this kingdom is shown by the verb with vav consecutive, to have been the consequence or result of his strength in hunting, so that hunting was intimately connected with the establishing of the kingdom. Hence, if the expression "a mighty hunter" relates primarily to hunting in the literal sense, we must add to the literal meaning the figurative signification of a "hunter of men" (a trapper of men by stratagem and force); Nimrod the hunter became a tyrant, a powerful hunter of men (Keil and Delitzsch 1975: 165). "in the face of YHVH can only mean "in defiance of YHVH," as Josephus and the Targums understand it (op. cit.: 166). And the proverb must have arisen when other daring and rebellious men followed in Nimrod's footsteps and must have originated with those who saw in such conduct an act of rebellion against the God of salvation, in other words, with the possessors of the divine promise of grace (loc. cit.). Often attributed to Nimrod, the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9) was not a Jack and the Beanstalk type of construction, where people were trying to build a structure to get into heaven. Instead, it is best understood as an ancient ziggurat (Assyrian "mountaintop"), as the one pictured here from ancient Ur of the Chaldees, Abraham's hometown (Genesis 11:31). A ziggurat was a man-made structure with a temple at its top, built to worship the host of heaven. After the Flood there was, at some point, a breakaway from YHVH. Only eight people descended from the Ark. Those people worshipped YHVH. But at some point an influential person became opposed to YHVH and gathered others to his side. I suggest that Nimrod is the one who did it. Cain had done similarly before the Flood, founding a new city and religious system. Our English translation of the Hebrew of Genesis 10:8-10 is weak. The author of this passage of Scripture will not call Gilgamesh by his name and honor him, but is going to call him by a derisive name, what he really is -- a rebel. Therefore we should translate Genesis 10:8-10 to read, Cush begat Nimrod; he began to be a tyrant in the earth. He was a tyrannical hunter in opposition to the Lord. Thus it is said, "Nimrod the tyrannical opponent of YHVH." Likewise, Gilgamesh was a man who took control by his own strength. In Genesis 10 Nimrod is presented as a type of him. Nimrod's descendants were the ones who began building the tower in Babel where the tongues were changed. Gilgamesh is a type of early city founders. (Page numbers below are from Heidel 1963) He is a "shepherd" .................. page 18 From Uruk ............................. page 17 (Kramer 1959: 31 calls Uruk, Erech.) A giant ................................... page 17 (11 cubits) Builds cities ............................ page 17 Vile man "takes women" ......... page 18 Mighty hunter ......................... page 18 Gilgamesh Confronts YHVH! The name of YHVH rarely appears in extra-Biblical literature in the Ancient Near East. Therefore we would not expect to find it in the Gilgamesh epic. But why should the God of the Jews rarely be mentioned? The Hebrew Bible is replete with the names of other gods. On the other hand, the nations surely knew of Him even though they had no respect for Him. If so, how might His Name appear in their literature, if at all? The name of YHVH, in a culture which is in rebellion against His rule, would most likely be in a derisive form, not in its true form. Likewise, the writers of Scripture would deride the rebels. Putting the Bible and the Gilgamesh Epic Together The Gilgamesh Epic describes the first "God is Dead" movement. In the Epic, the hero is a vile, filthy, perverted person, yet he is presented as the greatest, strongest, hero that ever lived. (Heidel 1963: 18). So that the one who sent the Flood will not trouble them anymore, Gilgamesh sets out to kill the perpetrator. He takes with him a friend who is a monstrous half-man, half-animal -- Enkidu. Together they go on a long journey to the Cedar Mountain to find and destroy the monster who sent the Flood. Gilgamesh finds him and finally succeeds in cutting off the head of the creature whose name is "Huwawa" ("Humbaba" in the Assyrian version; see Heidel 1963: 34ff). Is there a connection with the Gilgamesh epic and Genesis 10? Note what Gilgamesh says to Enkidu, the half-man, half-beast, who accompanied him on his journey, found in Tablet 111, lines 147 - 150. "If I fall," Gilgamesh says, "I will establish a name for myself. 'Gilgamesh is fallen,' they will say, 'in combat with terrible Huwawa.'" But the next five lines are missing from all tablets found so far! Can we speculate on what they say? Let's try . . . We suggest that those five lines include, "But if I win,.. they will say, Gilgamesh, the mighty vanquisher of Huwawa!" Why do we say that? Because Genesis 10:9 gives us the portion missing from the Gilgamesh tablets. Those lines include... "it is said, Nimrod (or Gilgamesh) the mighty vanquisher of YHVH." This has to be what is missing from all the clay tablets of the Gilgamesh story. The Gilgamesh Epic calls him Huwawa; the Bible calls Him YHVH. This face supposedly represents Huwawa who, according to the Gilgamesh's Epic, sent the Flood on the earth. According to the story, Huwawa (Humbaba in the Assyrian version) was killed by Gilgamesh and his half-man/half-beast friend, Enkidu. The author suggests Huwawa is the ancient pagan perspective of Yahweh (YHVH), the God of the Bible. About 3 inches (7.5 cm), this mask is dated to around the sixth century BC. Of an unknown provenance, it is now in the British Museum. Heidel, speaking of the incident as it is found on Tablet V says, All we can conclude from them (the lost lines) is that Gilgarnesh and Enkidu cut off the head of Humbaba (or Huwawa) and that the expedition had a successful issue (ending) (1963: 47). The missing lines from the Epic are right there in the Bible! Because of the parallels between Gilgamesh and Nimrod, many scholars agree that Gilgamesh is Nimrod. Continuing with Gilgamesh's fable, he did win, he did vanquish Huwawa and took his head. Therefore he could come back to Uruk and other cities and tell the people "not to worry about YHVH anymore, he is dead. I killed him over in the Lebanon mountains. So just live however you like, I will be your king and take care of you." There are still other parallels between the Bible and the Gilgamesh epic: "YaHVeH" has a somewhat similar sound to "Huwawa." Gilgamesh did just as the "sons of god" in Genesis 6 did. The "sons of god" forcibly took men's wives. The Epic says that is precisely what Gilgamesh did. The Bible calls Nimrod a tyrant, and Gilgamesh was a tyrant. There was a Flood in the Bible, there is a flood in the Epic. Cush is mentioned in the Bible, Kish in the Epic. Erech is mentioned in Scripture, Uruk was Gilgamesh's city. Gilgamesh made a trip to see the survivor of the Flood. This was more likely Ham than Noah, since "Nimrod" was Ham's grandson! Historically, Gilgamesh was of the first dynasty of Uruk. As Jacobsen points out (1939: 157), kings before Gilgamesh may be fictional, but not likely. The fact that the Gilgamesh Epic also contains the Deluge story would indicate a close link with events immediately following the Flood. S.N. Kramer says, A few years ago one would have strongly doubted his (historical) existence . . . we now have the certitude that the time of Gilgamesh corresponds to the earliest period of Mesopotamian history. (Kramer 1959: 117) Originally established by Nimrod (Genesis 10:11), and today known as Nimrud, Calah became an important city in Iraq. This is an artist's reconstruction of the interior of Tiglath-pileser III's palace (late seventh century BC). What a contrast Psalm 2 is compared with the Gilgamesh Epic! Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One. "Let us break their chains," they say, "and throw off their fetters." The One enthroned in heaven laughs, the Lord scoffs at them. Then he rebukes them in his anger and terrifies them in his wrath, saying, "I have installed my King on Zion, my holy hill." I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, "you are my Son, today I have become your Father, Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery." Therefore, you kings, be wise; he warned, you rulers of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him. (Psalm 2) Bibliography Brown, F., Driver, S.R., and Briggs, C.A.(abbreviated to BDB) 1962 A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Cassuto, U. 1964 A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. 2 Vols., Jerusalem: Magnes. Frankfort, R. 1948 Kingship and the Gods. Chicago: University Press. Heidel, A. 1963 The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago: University Press. Jacobsen, T. 1939 The Sumerian Kinglist. Chicago: University Press. Josephus 1998 Jewish Antiquities. Books I-III, Loeb Classics, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Kautzsch, E., ed. 1910 Genesius' Hebrew Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon. Kramer, S. N., ed. 1959 History Begins at Sumer. Garden City NY: Doubleday. Keil, C. F., and Delitzsch, P. 1975 Commentary on the Old Testament., Vol. I, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Pritchard, J. 1969 Ancient Near Eastern Texts and the Old Testament. 3rd ed., Princeton: University Press. Roux, G. 1992 Ancient Iraq. 3rd ed., Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin. Thomas, D.W. 1958 Documents From Old Testament Times. New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons.

HomepageArticles

 

© 2003 David Livingston

 

....

Taken from: http://davelivingston.com/nimrod.htm