RE: [asa] Adam and the Fall

Hi Don:
 
Aye, the rub is that ANE history is teeming with gods and goddesses, but
does that affect legitimate names, places, and events negatively? The
Sumerian King List is one example. The order of kingship includes
cities that have been excavated and the archaeological dates follow the
same order. The first two kings are non-Sumerian and the pottery
recovered at Eridu confirms that. The last four pre-flood kings
parallel the last four biblical patriarchs followed by: "Then the flood
swept thereover." Plus, the SKL has no mention of gods to cloud the
issue.
 
Consider the Assyrian king, Sennacherib (705-681 BC). Prior to 200
years ago the only way we could have known there was such a person was
through the mention of his name and his wars against Hezekiah, king of
Judah, in the OT (2 Kings, 2 Chron. and Isaiah).
 
Clay tablets began to surface from excavations in Mosul, Iraq, formerly
known as Nineveh, that shed much more light on this Assyrian king. Even
a bas relief profile of him that was carved in stone has been
discovered.
 
Nineveh had been the center of Assyria which was named after Asshur who
founded it according to Genesis 10:11. One tablet ascribed to
Sennacherib describes the wars from his perspective and he names
Hezekiah by name.
 
Although this does not certify that the version of the wars described by
Hezekiah was true in fact, it does at least verify independently of the
Bible that Hezekiah did exist. And if Asshur founded Nineveh a
latter-day king of that city likely was a direct line descendant.
Indeed, Sennacherib's grandson was named Ashurbanipal which would be
further indicative of both being direct line descendants.
 
There are numerous similarities between the Legend of Adapa and Adam of
Genesis. Archibald Sayce said that "Adapa" was mistranslated and should
have been rendered "Adamu." And Adamu in Akkadian is "Adam" in Hebrew.
 
According to inscriptions, Sennacherib said Ea (the god who created
Adapa) gave Adapa "vast intelligence." Sennacherib compared his own
accomplishments in conceiving the ground-plan of his palace and city
with that of Adapa who received his wisdom from his father, the wise Ea.
 
King Ashurbanipal referred to Adapa, "the sage." He recalled a dream
where Asshur (who had achieved god status) spoke to him, saying:
 
O king, lord of kings, offspring of the sage (Sennacherib)
and Adapa ... You surpass in knowledge even the apsu
(underworld) and all the wise men.
 
This is a quote from a man known to have existed historically testifying
that he descended from Sennacherib, who we know was his grandfather and
further to Adapa. Since we know from Genesis that a direct line of
descendants exists from Adam to Assur and we can infer that line
extended to Ashurbanipal, and since Ashurbanipal himself puts Adapa in
his line of ancestry, then we can deduce that Adapa and Adam are the
same man. And if a man we know existed names one of his own ancestors
we can assume that man existed also.
 
Both through the Bible and through testimony we can link one man,
Ashurbanipal, to Adam of Genesis and the legendary Adapa. God created
Adam according to Genesis. Ea created Adapa according to legend.
Created men can't fit in the middle of anybody's family tree, they can
only go at the top.
 
Before Cyrus of Persia established his reign, Nabonidus (555-539 BC) was
king of Babylon. His line of descent ran through Nabopolassar, father of
Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 24-26). Nabonidus too recalled the legendary
Adapa. Lamenting on an idol he had fashioned, he added not even the
"learned Adapa knows his (the idol's) name." Later in the same text, the
Babylonian king told of a "wisdom" he possessed that "greatly" surpassed
one which Adapa had "composed!"
 
This testimony puts the knowledge of Adapa/Adamu in another branch of
the family tree. Not only Assyrian kings but a Babylonia king also
speaks of the wisdom of the sage, Adapa.
 
In short, the weight of evidence falls on the likely existence of Adam
who began the race of Adamites, Semites, Israelites, Arabs, Jews, Greeks
and a few others in that region of the world. Early Christians
misunderstood Jewish history (Genesis 2-11) as human history but that's
a correctable mistake. We can work our OT theology around the
historical evidence and biblical testimony with no damage to New
Testament theology. How many are willing to do that is another
question.
 
Dick Fischer, GPA president
Genesis Proclaimed Association
"Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
www.genesisproclaimed.org <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Nield [mailto:d.nield@auckland.ac.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:38 PM
To: Dick Fischer
Cc: ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Adam and the Fall
 
Hi Dick:
I have already said that I accept that there are literary links between
Genesis and the ANE literature. I will now sharpen that to say that I
accept that there are close literary links between the names of Adam
and his descendants with their cognates in the ANE literature and
inscriptions. I also accept that many ANE inscriptions and much of the
ANE literature has links with ANE history. But why does that imply
that Adam has to be historical? Are you saying that none of ANE
literature is legendary or mythological?
Don
 
Dick Fischer wrote:
> Hi Don:
>
> If you watched an ant colony for an hour you might be able to jot down
a
> few observations. How many more observations and even insights might
> you glean from a years worth of observations? Similarities found in
the
> biblical account with ANE literature is only one aspect of it. I can
> give you just a few examples of things I learned from having devoted
> over a quarter century to digging up relevant evidence:
>
> The first mention of Adam (or Atum) comes from carvings in pyramids
> located in Egypt dated to 2400 BC which predates the Pentateuch. He
was
> "created" out of the waters of chaos and one of his sons was named
> "Seth." Coincidental? In the mindset of ancient Egypt and over the
> centuries it is only a short step from being created to being a
creator.
> Hymns to Atum honored him as such and one who accompanied the people,
> their pharaoh, and their land from birth to death to rebirth. In a
> similar vein to the Adapa legend, Atum would sail his boat across the
> sky and priests would sing hymns. Even a hearkening to Genesis 1 can
be
> seen in the following hymn to Atum:
>
> There were no heavens and no earth,
> There was no dry land and there were no
reptiles
> in the land .
>
> The first two names on the Sumerian King List are Semitic (Adamic)
> names, not Sumerian. Thus Eridu, the first city in southern
> Mesopotamia, was settled by Akkadians (or Adamites) and Ubaidans,
though
> who got there first is debatable. The pottery found at Eridu
> corroborates the SKL.
>
> The city Cain built was called Enoch in the Semitic tongue and "Unug"
by
> the Sumerians. It was located north of the Euphrates and up the same
> canal that watered Eridu the home of Adapa, or Adamu (Adam in Hebrew).

>
> When Eridu was "smitten with weapons" after the second king, Alalgar,
> kingship was transferred to a Sumerian city, Badtabira. This was the
> first war in recorded history and was between Akkadians (Adamites) and
> Sumerians. There is evidence the Adamic line then moved to Erech
> (Sumerian Uruk) located virtually across the street from the city of
> Enoch. This closeness in proximity explains the similarities in the
> names of Cain's sons with Seth's sons. Also the pottery found at
Eridu
> and at Uruk at the same level shows no Sumerian occupation, although
> after the flood these cities were resettled by Sumerians who survived
> the flood having lived further east outside the primary flood zone.
> Thus the pottery, the SKL, the flood legends, even the layers of
> "water-laid" clay found in the cities all agree.
>
> Even the names of Adam's grandsons, Enoch and Enosh, corroborates the
> Genesis ties with ANE history. The En- prefix indicates kingship or
> lordship in Akkadian and Sumerian. That's why the Akkadian Ea (Yah in
> Hebrew) is the Sumerian Enki, meaning "lord of the earth."
>
> The Akkadian name Adamu perpetuated down through generations.
Excavated
> graveyards carried his name. An Assyrian king was named Adamu, as was
a
> Canaanite governor. The Sumerians called a list of captured slaves
the
> "Adambi." The legend of Adapa (or Adamu) was found in various Semitic
> languages all over the region although the Sumerians, who were
> unrelated, ignored Semitic patriarchs unless they were kings. And the
> last four kings on the SKL parallel the Genesis patriarchs.
>
> The "trinity" of Gods the Akkadians worshipped parallels the Trinity
we
> worship today. Even the Sumerians adopted the Akkadian gods. When
> Sumerians depicted Enki, or Enlil on cylinder seals they are dressed
in
> Akkadian attire. The Akkadian ilu, their father-god, we see as El in
> Hebrew. Enlil, the third in Akkadian god hierarchy, translates lord
of
> the air, breath or spirit.
>
> The flood is recorded in the SKL and various Akkadian legends. The
only
> Sumerian version of the flood is simply a translation from the
Akkadian
> version. The Sumerian hero-king, Gilgamesh is depicted in twelve
> tablets. The eleven written in Sumerian say nothing of any biblical
> patriarchs or biblical events. The only tablet that includes the
flood
> story was an Akkadian (Semitic) invention. Thus it was the Semites
who
> perpetuated the flood story because it was their story. It was the
> destruction of their people.
>
> The ziggurats were built originally as a means to survive floods. The
> shape of the base of each ziggurat will tell whether they were
Akkadian
> or Sumerian and each one corresponds to the location of each race.
> Sennacherib boosts about destroying Babylon and scattering all the
> bricks (which included the infamous tower) in the canal. The tower
was
> rebuilt by Nebuchadnezzar and his father and described centuries later
> by Herodotus.
>
> These are just a few examples of what you can see if you bother to
look.
> In essence, you could almost completely piece together the entire
> Genesis 2-11 narrative with the mass of extra-biblical evidence from
the
> Near East, including the line of patriarchs: Adam, Enoch, Methusaleh,
> Lamech, and Noah, and Josephus covers them from Shem to Abraham. Even
> Berossus refers to Abraham: "In the tenth generation after the flood
> there was a man among the Chaldeans who was just, great and
> knowledgeable about heavenly phenomena."
>
> Now when someone doesn't bother to look and simply pronounces this
part
> of biblical history unhistorical, it galls me, quite frankly. Better
> they just profess ignorance if they have no curiosity or willingness
to
> check out the facts. It's like the Iranian president declaring the
> holocaust didn't happen. I can remember seeing newsreel footage of
the
> camp at Buchenwald when the Yanks arrived. All Ahmadinejad has to do
is
> look at the movie!
>
> Dick Fischer, GPA president
> Genesis Proclaimed Association
> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
> www.genesisproclaimed.org <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Nield [mailto:d.nield@auckland.ac.nz]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:49 PM
> To: Dick Fischer
> Cc: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] Adam and the Fall
>
> I would like to ask Dick a simple question: exactly what would Denis
> have gained if he had read your book? I accept that you establish in
> detail a strong literary link between Genesis and ANE literature. I
also
>
> accept that a good deal of ANE literature deals with historical
matters.
>
> But why is that a valid argument for the historicity of the Adam of
> Genesis? Should one not distinguish between the different genres
> constituting literature?
> Don
>
> Dick Fischer wrote:
>
>> Ian wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> But I am convinced that Denis has something substantive to say to us
>>>
> as
>
>>>
>>>
>> we struggle to faithfully respond to God's revelations of himself
>> through the book of God's word and the book of God's works.<
>>
>> Denis may have something substantive to say but this isn't it.
Having
>> myself established a basis to legitimize the historicity of this man
>>
> we
>
>> call Adam today that the Akkadians called "Adamu" and who had
>>
> namesakes
>
>> for centuries after he lived, I can say with confidence that there is
>>
> a
>
>> high degree of likelihood there was just such a man, and I can say
>> without hesitation that Denis is totally out to lunch on this issue.
>> And having nothing to contribute he should simply vocalize the same.
>>
> On
>
>> the subject of history, my organization, Genesis Proclaimed
>>
> Association
>
>> had a booth at a recent Faculty Commons Leadership conference in
>> Arlington, VA. Denis was there and came up to my booth and
introduced
>> himself. My book, Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham was
>>
> available
>
>> at a discount price. He didn't buy it. So how can he deliberately
>> avoid exposure to the evidence and then make public pronouncements
>>
> that
>
>> such evidence doesn't exist? Heck, I would have given him the book.
>>
>> Dick Fischer, GPA president
>> Genesis Proclaimed Association
>> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
>> www.genesisproclaimed.org <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>
>>
>>
>>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 13 10:42:58 2008