>The contrast between our view of the Godhead and the Accadians' view is far
>greater than any similarity. In fact I wonder if there is any similarity at
>all. Although at one point in Mesopotamian history a triad dominated the
>universe, there were always other important gods as well and hundreds,
indeed
>thousands of lesser gods.
Well, not "always."
Although it is impossible to be sure due to the scarcity of historical
evidence
prior to 2,000 BC, the Accadian "trinity" at the very beginning consisted
of "ilu"
the father-god in heaven, which is the root of the Canaanite "el" that we
see in
elohim and El Shadai - it is the Hebrew word for God. Ilu also is the root
of "the
Islamic "allah." The second was "Ea," possibly an early form of "Emmanuel,"
and Enlil which means lord or king of the "air," "breath" or "spirit." It
is hard
to miss the similarity
>And at other points in Mesopotamian history the
>triad was not dominant. Most importantly, these gods were all separate and
>different personalties not sharing any common center. For example, one god
of
>the triad, Anu, was angry with another god of the triad, Ea, for warning a
>man about the coming flood.
By the time of these writings, "ilu" had been corrupted to "Anu" under
pressure
of the Sumerian "An." And indeed, the Sumerian pantheon of 3,000 to 4,000
gods had clearly rubbed off on the Semitic Accadians. BTW, followers of Anu
were called "Anunnaki." Not gods, not human, the word still survives today
as
"angel."
Although there isn't enough evidence I can make a strong case for it, there
likewise isn't enough contrary evidence that it can be denied vociferously
either.
Further, I think Genesis 1:26 leaves the door open on something other than
strict
monotheism in early Hebrew thought: "And God said, Let us make man in our
image, after our likeness ..."
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."