From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sat Nov 23 2002 - 15:52:42 EST
Dick Fischer wrote:
>
> George Murphy wrote:
>
> >Dick Fischer wrote:
> >
> > > George Murphy wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Our concept of the Godhead has no parallel that I know of. And
> > even if the
> > > > > Accadians had a similar belief, I don't know how they would
> > express that
> > > > > with rudimentary writing skills. I'm not sure that we
>Christians all
> > > > > understand how God can be in three persons either.
> > > > >
> > > > > But all the other cultures are not the Accadian culture. They
> > appear to be
> > > > > the historic equivalent of the Adamic race which history books
> > > > > ignore. Since Hebrew derived from the Accadian language, and the
> > Accadians
> > > > > wrote a flood account, and worshipped three gods from the
> > beginning until
> > > > > the Sumerians corrupted them, it certainly is not a reach to posit
> > that the
> > > > > Semitic race derived from the Accadians, and that they
>may have had a
> > > > > primitive knowledge of the spiritual realm as we believe it exists.
> > > > >
> > > > > To a primitive culture, the idea of three gods could be a
>preamble to
> > > > > accepting a multitude of gods when another culture is so pervasive
> > as were
> > > > > the Sumerians to the Accadians. Certainly beginning with Abraham,
> > > > > monotheism is in vogue. But did we Christians learn of three Gods
> > from the
> > > > > NT, or did we re-learn it? If God is in three persons, why would
> > God (the
> > > > > father) have kept that a secret from His people - if the
>Accadians and
> > > > > Adamites are one and the same?
> > > >
> > > > Christians never did learn of "three Gods" - the
>doctrine of the
> > > > Trinity isn't
> > > >tritheism. & there is nothing in the OT, read on its own terms, that
> > > >states a 3-fold
> > > >character of God. On one wall of my study is a little reproduction of
> > > >Rubelev's icon of
> > > >the Trinity - Abraham's three visitors in Genesis 18! But again, that
> > > >interpretation
> > > >comes from reading the OT account in light of the NT.
> > > > Your final question is equivalent to "Why did God
>wait until ~4
> > > > B.C. to become
> > > >incarnate"?" I don't know.
> > >
> > > Nor do any of us. What I am suggesting, though, is the possibility that
> > > Christ may have been known in spirit form as Ea before His
>incarnation at
> > > Bethlehem.
> >
> > Belief in the activity of the pre-incarnate Logos in _all_ people has
> > strong
> >support in the Christian tradition. I think that this can be affirmed if
> >it is
> >dealt with carefully. It is connected with the belief that the Logos was
> >the agent
> >of creation and the source of human rationality. But it goes beyond this
> >to say
> >that the Logos was known under some specific name, as if a particular
> >deity of some
> >people could be identified distinctively as the 2d Person of the
> >Trinity. & this
> >traditional idea would not restrict the activity of the Logos to the
> >Accadians or
> >any other people.
>
> Thank you for the addition. Although I don't know what other culture made
> such a coincidental identification.
There are divine triads in other cultures - e.g., Brahma,
Vishnu & Siva in
Hinduism. It would be very questionable to try to identify this with
the Christian
Trinity because it is not grounded in God's historical revelation in
Christ. At most,
it might provide a way of making some initial contact with a Hindu.
I am certainly no expert on Accadian religion but I would
need to be shown that
Ea had any characteristics that would identify him with Christ in any
clearer way than
one might, e.g., try to identify Vishnu/Krishna with Christ. & there
would be no
apologetic value in doing so since there are (to my knowledge) no
extant believers in
the Accadian gods.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 16:54:54 EST