Oh, I gotcha -- there are multiple Adamu's downstream from Noah. I thought you meant there were multiple paths back upstream to the original Adamu.
Dick -- I should say again that I agree with your data's relevance to the Bible. But when the later Semites -- the Hebrews of the Exodus -- wrote their own unique origins story, they weren't simply reproducing the earlier myths and they were no longer interested only in the Semites. They had more to say than the earlier myths were saying, and they had freedom to adapt the earlier stories for their present theological needs.
Consider this:
1. Expanded theological vision:
The Hebrews had a much broader view of the world and its theological needs than their Mesopotamian ancestors did. The Hebrews of the Exodus were coming out of Egypt, not Mesopotamia, and their ancestor Abraham had abandoned the Mesopotamian culture long before Genesis was written.
2. Need for a creation story:
Mesopotamian literature did have stories that told the creation of mankind as a whole (not just the Sumerians, not just the Akkadians, but all mankind). Where is the equivalent account in the Bible, if it is not the creation of Adam?
3. Genesis 2 parallels the Mesopotamian Creation story of all mankind:
The Atrahasis creation account has strong parallels to Genesis 2. The gods created mankind to do the work of cultivating plants, as did God in the Bible. The gods created mankind out of
clay, as did God in the Bible. The creation account immediately states homely rules about man & woman coming together as couples, both in the Atrahasis account and in Genesis. A period of time passes and then the gods are angry and send a flood, as did God in the Bible. Clearly, Moses was copying aspects Atrahasis, making Adam's creation parallel to the Mesopotamian creation of all mankind.
4. Genesis 2 does not parallel key aspects of the Adapa story:
Adapa is not made from clay as Adam is. Adapa is a baker, not a gardener. Adapa does not state or is not given homely rules about man & woman coming together to be husband and wife (indicating the initiation of mankind). It's hard to find anything in the Adapa story that really parallels Adam's story. Yes, there seems to be some
similarity in the Adapa story about failing to achieve immortality.
But for Adapa it had no consequence for his descendants like it did with Adam (e.g., Cain knew good from evil). If the biblical Adam was derived from Adapa at all, then we must concede at a minimum that it was changed in ways that make it far more similar to the Mesopotamian creation of mankind than to the Mesopotamian Adapa story.
Summary
IMO, there seems to be a blending of themes from Adapa and from the Atrahasis creation account, but wherever we see these themes they have been radically changed to reflect the new theology. Some of the changes might be intentional irony to get20their point across. For example, while Adapa was simply given clothes in heaven, Adam first had his fig leaves removed and then had them replaced by a sacrificed animal skin. The Hebrew author wanted us to know the real significance of "clothes" (works versus sacrifice, prefiguring being clothed in Christ). While Adapa refused to eat the bread of "life" since Ea (understood to be man's friend) told him it was the bread of "death", Adam _chose_ to eat the fruit of "knowledge of good and evil" even though God told him it would bring death and the tempter told him it would not be death. Everything is turned topsy-turvy.
IMO, the Genesis account is "flavored" by the Mesopotamian accounts, but it shares none of the same theological ingredients. It's narrative combines images from the older creation account (making the polytheistic into the monotheistic) with images from Adapa's failure (making the anecdotal into the universal). That's because the Hebrew writer had different things to theologically explain than did the Mesopotamian culture.
Because of these radical changes, the Hebrews were free to transform their "Adapa" into a universal character, representing all mankind. I believe with you that there was indeed a literal Adam the father of Seth in the neolithic period, but that the Hebrews expanded him into a literary character in the stories of creation and the Fall. Thus, the timing of the literal Adam/Adapa in Mesopotamia does not correlate to the actual timing of20mankind's origin, even though his character in Genesis 2-3 tells us the true theology of mankind's origin.
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
To: philtill@aol.com
Cc: ASA <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 1:12 pm
Subject: RE: [asa] Two questions... (bottlenecking)
Hi Phil:
Noah had three sons. The Assyrian post
flood king list begins with kings who “lived in tents.” Tudia is
first and Adamu is second. A Canaanite governor also was named Adamu. This
puts the same name on two different branches of Noah’s descendent family
tree. One from Shem and one from Ham. The Japhethites all headed west so we
don’t have any more biblical information beyond Noah’s great
grandsons.
To date, six fragments of the Adapa
legend have been discovered written in various Semitic languages. Versions and
fragments of the Adapa legend have been found in Akkadian, Canaanitish-Babylonian,
Assyrian and Amorite. Even a Sumerian version similar to the Akkadian legend
was discovered at Tell Haddad.
I believe that is significant in that
different branches of the family tree thought the legend important enough to
copy it into their own languages. Sumerian was the official language of the
region until Sargon gained power in 2371 BC. So the version copied into
Sumerian would not indicate that the Sumerians had any pa
rticular interest in Adapa/Adamu.
A list of Sumerian slaves, for example, was called the “Adambi.” The
legend of Ziusudra in Sumerian is a copy of Atrahasis in Akkadian. Even the
SKL was written in Sumerian for the same reason. Sumerian was the official
language. So whether the SKL was set down by Sumerians or Akkadians can’t
really be ascertained.
Dick Fischer, GPA president
Genesis Proclaimed Association
"Finding Harmony in Bible, Science
and History"
www.genesisproclaimed.org
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
[mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf
Of philtill@aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009
8:59 AM
To: dickfischer@verizon.net;
asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Two
questions... (bottlenecking)
Hi Dick,
you wrote:
Adapa/Adamu is the lone exception and yet this legend had such
importance it was copied into various Semitic languages on different branches
of Noah’s family tree!
Please explain -- I only see one branch in the Bible.
Are you referring to the SKL?
Phil
-----Original
Message-----
From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
To: philtill@aol.com
Cc: ASA <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 12:39 pm
Subject: RE: [asa] Two questions... (bottlenecking)
Hi Phil:
0A
As to Adam being a real flesh and blood
human being, the bloodline from Adam to the twelve tribes was common
knowledge. From the twelve tribes, the Jews recorded the births o f their
children in the temple in Jerusalem simply because it was important for them to
know who belonged to which tribe. This was especially important for
choosing marriage partners. Only we Christians could imagine untold
scores of missing generations. To them it would be and still today is
unthinkable. Copying mistakes – sure, an occasional inadvertent
deletion, that’s to be expected. But simply as a20device to drive
Adam back into antiquity tens of thousands of years? You gotta be kidding.
Human nature doesn’t seem to change
much over the eons. I believe we can make observations about human nature
as we see it today and project it back to determine what is likely to have
happened. I had lunch with an anthropologist who subscribes to the theory
based upon DNA evidence that there was no gene flow between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens whereas I think it is
likely. At the outset is likely that Homo
sapiens pushed Neanderthals into extinction as they have done with
many other lesser creatures that are no longer with us today. In warfare
(something I do know a little about), normally in ancient days the men would
gird up for an assault on remote villages or cities occupied by other
races,
nationalities, colors, or in this case another species, or sub species.
If the marauders are success ful they dispatch the men of the other villages
and are left with the women and children. What do you think plundering
men would do with an assortment of young women newly available? It
doesn’t a lot of imagination to see that the polite phrase “gene
flow” would result. Why did 500,000 Spanish men immigrate to South
America beginning with the Conquistadors? Gold and booty.
Now, go to any
supermarket and look at the front pages of the magazines on the racks.
What do you see? Pictures of movie stars and rock stars, and lurid
stories about them on the inside which you can read if only you buy those
scandal rags and take them home. We have a fascination about famous,
glamorous people. That results in stories which these stars sometimes
have to vehemently deny. Racy stories about famous people sells copy and
makes money for all those in the magazine industry who have no compunction with
stretching the truth or making stuff up if necessary. =0 ANow apply what
we know to the question at hand. The legends of Dumuzi (Hebrew Tammuz)
and Gilgamesh, are cases in point. Both men are on the Sumerian King
List. Both lived fabulous lives according to the legends about
them. These stories were invented and copied by scribes who sold their
work and profited from the enterprise.0A
This brings us to Adam,
Adapa/Adamu. Just as in the supermarket tabloids, gods, goddesses, kings
and the occasional queen got loads of press in Sumer
and Akkad. Adapa/Adamu is the lone exception and yet this legend had such
importance it was copied into various Semitic languages on different branches
of Noah’s family tree! That is significant. The commonalities
between the legend and the man Adam are striking. So I would co nclude
that in all likelihood there was such a man from whom the Jews descended.
The graveyards of Mesopotamia were filled with his namesakes. The legend
arose about him as he was a “rock star,” known to everybody and the
cuneiform clay tablets were an easy sale. That makes more sense to me
than the idea that “Adam is a symbolic character in a
literary/theological account.” Symbolic characters don’t have
flesh and blood offspring.
Dick Fischer, GPA president
Genesis Proclaimed Association
"Finding Harmony in Bible, Science
and History"
www.genesisproclaimed.org
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of philtill@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009
8:54 PM
To: dickfischer@verizon.net; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Two
questions... (bottlenecking)
Hi Dick, my answers are interspersed below.
=0 A
>>
If Adam lived at Eridu and Eridu was dated by archaeologist at 4800 BC, and if the
flood was at 2900 BC that puts 1900 years between covered by ten
generations. You can do that math. <<
=0 A
I agree there is a literary connection between the Adam of
the Bible and the Adapa/Adamu of the Mesopotamian literature, but only a
literary connection. I don't agree that the "Adam" of the
Hebrew was an individual identical to the (presumably) historical Adapa/Adamu
that inspired the Mesopotamian myths. Therefore the Seth geneology that
begins with Adam is not constrained to begin at the date of Eridu. I
believe Adam is a symbolic character in a literary/theological account, and he
represents the origin of all humanity (not just the Jews). When the
writer of Genesis 2-3 chose the name to give this myth ological character, he
undoubtedly would have given him the name that was famously handed down within
Mesopotamian literature -- Ada pa/Adamu. That's the way the myth genre
works. It builds on prior myths in order to poignantly make its intended
statements. This part of Genesis follows (as literature) the norms of
that genre (although it is inspired and tells the theological truth). So
there are definitely connec
tions to Mesopotamian myth, but I don't believe they
are always literal history.
>>
Any errors in numerology would foul that up. If the flood was at 2900 BC
and Abraham can be dated around 2000 BC, that puts 900 years between and 90
years between generations. Long life required.<<
There is a lot of uncertainty in the
dating of both Abraham and the Flood. I agree that the Flood at Shurrupak
is probably the one that inspired (more than the other majo r floods) the flood
myths of Mesopotamia, and therefore it is the one that the Biblic al writer was
interpreting theologically in light of the Abrahamic faith. But that does
not give us enough certainty in the number of years to overthrow what we know
from biology and the clear statistics of the Patriarch ages and SKL. The
OT chronologies are ALL problematic, and this probably reflects many changes of
numbering and dating systems down through the years.
>>
The names for Noah are Ziusudra in Sumerian and Utnapishtim in Akkadian, both
translate about the same: “he who found long life.” The
reason Gilgamesh sought him out was because it was thought he had the secret of
eternal life. <<
But this is irrelevant as to w
hether the
historical flood hero lived a literal 600 years and then died, because in the
Mesopotamian myths he lived eternally. In the Bible he actually died far
earlier than any of his20anscestors, if the dates were literal. Thus, he
is not "one who found long life" in that context. The
discrepancy between the Mesopotamian accounts and the biblical is that in the
former he had been fully mythologized into a Santa Clause-like figure.
Consider the similarities: He lived forever with his wife (Mrs. Clause),
in a remote location (North Pole) that could only be reached by a special
vehicle (sleigh) piloted by magical creatures (flying reindeer). All
these elements are in the Mesopotamian myth of Ziusudra and have no basis in
historical fact. Also, the cultural importance of th e Flood accounts in
Mesopotamia was huge (and so is the Christmas story with Santa, today).
And both Ziusudra and Santa were originally real people, but became
mythologized due to the cultural importance they took on until at last the
inflated mythological versions bore no resemblance to the real persons.
In both cases, this took place over a thousand or so years. No wonder the
writer of Genesis wanted to re-interpret the Flood and set it straight,
theologically! Conclusion: the existence of a Santa Clause-like
figure in Mesopotamian myths is is no evidence that people actually lived long
ages.
>>
In Jubilees, all the20sons and grandsons and their families remained with Noah
until he died then they departed. That means Noah was contemporary with
at least three more generations after the flood.<<
Not unl ike some people who live relatively long lives today
-- but let's also remember that Jubilees is not in the canon of Scripture and
may have contained inflated, mythological material.
>>
The whole story of Abraham’s life was how he was 75 years old before he
left Mesopotamia and thought to be too old to have children so Sarah convinces
him to knock up an Egyptian lady, then years later he has Isaac, then blah,
blah, blah, an d he dies at 175. The story makes no sense if he lived to
only 40 or 50 years which was normal for per sons who lived during that time
frame.<<
Yes, but there is a huge difference between Abraham's age
versus 300 or 500 or 900; the biological differences are huge. But
anyhow, I am also keeping in the back of my head that maybe these dates for
Abraham are also mis-tra nslated, and that Paul in referring to these ages had
to use the figures available in the 1st century translations otherwise his
words have been unintelligible to his audience. So I wonder whether God's
method of inspiring Paul guaranteed the historical accuracy of the figures20or
just the accuracy of Paul's citation of the MSS extant in his day. Paul's
argument does not really require the dates to be exact, and 175 is still of the
order of magnitude of an ordinary life (unlike the Patriarch ages). Since
Abraham and Sarah never had children in the first 20, 30, 40, etc., years of
their marriage, they probably had already drawn conclusions about the
"deadness" of Sarah's womb and of Abraham's body, long before their
ages became unusual. To be intell ectually honest, I am considering this
possibility and leaving it as an undecided point that God might one day
explain. But if Abraham did live to literally 175 years of age, then
praise God for blessing Abraham! In any case, it does not explain nor
therefore overthrow all the strong numerical evidence that the Patriarch ages
were mistranslations.
>>
Josephus recorded: “Now Moses says that thi s flood began on the
twenty-seventh day of the forementioned month; and was two thousand two hundred
and fifty-six years from Adam the first man; and the time is written down in
our sacred books, those who then lived having noted down, with great accuracy,
both the births and deaths of illustrious men.” Once again ten
generation divided into 2,256 requires long life spans.<<
< span style="font-size: 10pt;
font-family: Arial; color: black;">This can't possibly be
of any
consequence, since Josephus was a product of the 1st century AD and was working
with the MSS as they existed in his day. The canonization of20the
mis-translated and edited version of the Scriptures probably occurred several 100's
of years before Josephus to explain the branching and full acceptance of the
three manuscript families that existed by his time.
>>
Again Josephus: “I am borne out in what I have said by all those that have
written antiquities, both among the Greeks and Barbarians: for Manetho, who
wrote the Egyptian history, and Berosus, who compiled the Chaldean, and Mochus
and Hestiæus and Hieronymyus the Egyptian, who compiled the Phoenician history,
agree to what I here say. And Hesiod, Hecatæus, Hellanicus and Acusilaus,
and beside them, Ephorus and Nicolaus, relate that the ancients lived a
thousand years.” <<
None of
these voices were early enough to give anywhere near a trustworthy
witness. The basic problem is that they were all handling very old, very
ill-understood myths. The ones who may have had access to the Bible or to
rumors derived from a distance from those who had the Bible were likewise
dealing with numbers that could no longer be understood because the original
number system was long extinct.
=0 A
=0
A
In particular:
Hesoid lived between 1200 and 700 BC,
making him at least 1.7 millennia after the Shurrupak flood and probably much
later. Hestiaeus
and Ephorus lived in the 300's BC, about 2.5 millenia
after the flood. Manethro and Berossus li ved in the 300's to 200's BC,
about 2.5 millenia after the flood. Moschus lived ca. 150 BC. I
can't find a Hieronymus who was an Egyptian (only one from Cardia who20was
indeed an historian, 354-250 BC). But any Hieronymus "the Egyptian"
would likewise have been in the Hellenistic period or later because his name is
Greek. Heallanicus lived a bit
earlier in the 400's, but was and is considered unreliable and to have used
poor methods. Acusilaus lived even earlier in the 500's,20but Wikipedia has
this to say of him:
"Three books of his genealogies are
quoted, which were for the most part only a translation of Hesiod into prose. Acusilaus
claimed to have taken some of his information from bronze tablets discovered in
his garden which were inscribed with information, a source looked upon with
suspicion by some modern commentators."
And he is still a good 1.4 millennia after the flood!
The only Nocolaus I can find was contemporary with Josephus and maybe too late
to be the one he was citing.
0A
&nb sp;
Of these, none are anywhere near the age of the Flood.
Hesiod is far older than the rest, but he wasn't dealing with Semitic legends;
he was dealing with purely Greek mythologies. From the little I read of
Hesiod I don't recall anybody living 1000's of years, but it's not unbelievable
that a Greek poet would put something like that into his poetry. He became
an authority to the subsequent Greeks so if he put something like that in one
of his songs then no doubt it was repeated forever in the Greek world.
None of this tells us anything reliable enough to overthrow biology or the
statistical/numerical evidence that the ages are mistranslations.
Phil
A Good
Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just
2 easy steps!
A Good
Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Feb 13 21:50:24 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Feb 13 2009 - 21:50:25 EST