The Fall...

[FightingFat]

I’ve been having an interesting discussion about the Garden of Eden and the creation stories. Particularly, God’s actions with respect to the fall.
I have a friend who says: -

it’s not just gaining wisdom, but fear that we would eat from the other tree, the tree of immortality and become like “them” (as God refers to himself in the plural here). God very clearly kicks them out of the garden out of fear that they will become immortal.
Genesis, Chapter 3, verses 22-24
“And the LORD GOD said, behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: Therefore the LORD GOD sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man and placed at the east of the gard of Eden Cheubims and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”

Chapter 2, verse 9 also clarifies that there are two special tree in the Garden.

If I really wanted to bug you out, I would tell you to read carefully what the serpent said. Some “Gnostics” felt that the Serpent actually represented Christ and the old testament God represented the rule of Satan and that Jesus ended his rule, both at the tree and then later when he came to Earth. This point of view is also suprisingly put forth by the CS Lewis’ fiction work (the space trilogy) unlike his nonfiction, which is very conventional.

Of course this tale is an adaptation of an earlier Sumerian stories and such, of course some would argue that the Sumerian tale MUST be the adaptation and that the biblical version must be the correct, historical version… Anyway, in that version, Two brother gods rule the planet, Enki and Enlil, Enlil is the boss and Enki is sort of in charge of humanity. Enki was also the god of medicine, hence the serpent symbology in modern medicine and the connection to Enki as a “serpent” figure. Enki is a sort of trickster god archetype who is always finding sneaky ways to help humans get smarter, or more technologically advanced and survive attempts by other gods to wipe them out, like the great flood. Anyway, all very interesting for an ancient history buff like me, did I mention Abraham was a Sumerian high priest? (not some quaint goat herder as often depicted, but a mega poweful king/priest who commanded wealth and troops).

I must admit to feeling a bit lost. Sumerian high priest? Immortality?? Two trees?

I have an ortodox Catholic perspective on Genesis and have encountered questions before, my understanding is as stated in ‘Free from All Error’ by Fr. Wiliam Most which states: -

God made all things; in some special way, He made the first human pair; He gave them a command (we do not know what that command was- the garden and the fruit are part of the stage setting); they violated the command and fell from favour

(p.61)

To be honest, this has always sated my appetite for Genesis’ mysteries. So, maybe someone here can help me?

 

[twf]

The story should be common to all Mankind, if indeed there was a Fall. It is not a problem for the Faith. There are other cultures with similar stories. Scripture is inspired, thus we can trust that it has the most reliable version of the story.

Check out answersingenesis.org/creation/v7/i2/noah.asp. A very isolated people with both a creation and flood story with striking similarities to the Biblical account. There are many such examples.

 

[Apologia100]

First of all, the caduseus (the winged staff entined with snakes) that usually symbolizes the medical profession was the symbol of the Greek god Hermes. It has nothing to do with Sumerian anything.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

FightingFat:

I’ve been having an interesting discussion about the Garden of Eden and the creation stories. Particularly, God’s actions with respect to the fall.
I have a friend who says: -

I must admit to feeling a bit lost. Sumerian high priest? Immortality?? Two trees?

I have an ortodox Catholic perspective on Genesis and have encountered questions before, my understanding is as stated in ‘Free from All Error’ by Fr. Wiliam Most which states: -

(p.61)

To be honest, this has always sated my appetite for Genesis’ mysteries. So, maybe someone here can help me?

As to what your friend said:

Of course this tale is an adaptation of an earlier Sumerian stories

It could owe something to them - there are common features: such as nakedness, the mention of a serpent, trees, the word “eden”, a man and woman pair, a possible pun on the words for “rib” & “life”, to name a few.​

A likelier source, rather than influence, is Canaan

There is no one Sumerian text with all these features - though this objection is weakened slightly by the presence of more than one source behind the current text of Genesis 1 to 3. The real objection to a direct dependence on a Sumerian origin, is that several elements of the text appear in Canaanite texts as well. The end of Sumerian culture can’t be exactly dated - it had been blending with the Semitic culture of Babylonia for centuries before the end of the Third Dynasty of Ur (about 2000 BC). ##

and such, of course some would argue that the Sumerian tale

Which one ? There are many to choose from​

MUST be the adaptation and that the biblical version must be the correct, historical version… Anyway, in that version, Two brother gods rule the planet, Enki and Enlil, Enlil is the boss and Enki is sort of in charge of humanity.

I suppose this came from Zecharia Sitchin - the Erich von Daniken of Sumerology ​

There is no such myth, and there were more gods than these two. There were snake-gods, but Enki, despite his association with water, is not among them. BTW, he is never represented as the brother of Enlil; Enlil is descended, in some texts, from primeval gods who include the pair Enki and Ninki; or, he has a son named Enki - the latter being our god; among many other sons. Enki was the god of Eridu on the Persian Gulf; his father Enlil was the god of Nippur, which was a sort of Sumerian Mecca.

Sumer was made up of a patchwork of city-states - it was not an integrated state except under a strong ruler such as Sargon of Akkad & his descendants, or the Third Dynasty of Ur. “Babylonia” came into being after the Sumerians. ##

As for “ruling the planet”; this can be said only if one distorts royal titles such as “king of the totality” - Enki is well-disposed to the human race, and in some myths is even their co-creator; but never ruler of the planet. The Sumerians thought of their own country as “the Land” - the one that really mattered; an approach to geography paralleled in other cultures. Besides, Anu rather than Enlil is king of the gods, therefore, of mankind; especially in Sumer. Which is a bit simplified ##

Enki was also the god of medicine, hence the serpent symbology in modern medicine and the connection to Enki as a “serpent” figure. Enki is a sort of trickster god archetype who is always finding sneaky ways to help humans get smarter, or more technologically advanced and survive attempts by other gods to wipe them out, like the great flood. Anyway, all very interesting for an ancient history buff like me, did I mention Abraham was a Sumerian high priest? (not some quaint goat herder as often depicted, but a mega poweful king/priest who commanded wealth and troops).

That last point is not justified, however - De Vaux (The Early History of Israel, vol.1 ET 1978) deals with what Abram was, in detail.​

This link may be helpful. ##

 

[Herzeleid]

As a Christian, I find the attempts at refuting these alternative views of creation to be adolescent, weak and lacking.

It is too easy to say, “The Bible is inspired so it’s the truth.” People are thinkers and they want proof.

Zecharia Sitchin and some of the others in this movement mention the many Sumerian tablets that have not even been decoded. Why don’t theologians dig into these things? We might learn something, if nothing else to show how they err in some aspect or to reinforce the Gospel.

Zecharia Sitchin mentions how he was dismissed for continually bringing up the mistranslation of the Hebrew word “nephilim.” It was translated as giants but seemed to indicate something like “those who came from above” or something. These things should be dug into. This UFO/Alien movement isn’t going to go away. People are attracted to in droves.

Christians are instructed to be quick in providing answers to questions asked by non-believers. Look at all the emphasis on apologetics these days. We can show how abortion is bad, etc. but some areas just seem to lack good and truthful answers.

When something of this nature is put on the back burner, people make the assumption that the Church is hiding something. This is not good.

Perhaps it exists but I just haven’t found the Church’s rebuttal to these claims. I found one site that I’m reading in this regard that is very interesting. It is found at ivanfraser.com/articles/conspiracies/etagenda.html

I’m not saying it is the total truth and accepted by the Church but it does expose some aspects of this ET agenda.

I look forward to responses in this thread and hope others will be able to articulate good answers to this that we’re seeing become so pervasive in the world today.

God Bless & May God Have Mercy On Us.

 

[spauline]

I don’t know if this would help, but I think a theological analysis of the dragon’s lies deserves to be developed. I’m a theologian wanna be and give it try below, which I will quote, and which builds off of the Theology of the Body:

…

***The lies of the dragon seem to be summarized in ***two components:

“You will surely not die!” Which implies that God is not telling the truth, which simply implies, do not believe in anything that God has said, and do not believe there are any consequences to lack of faith and/or disobeying the revelation.

This is the first and greatest lie, and the second is like it:

Once man has no regard for what God has said, nor to obey Him, it necessarily implies that he neither needs God nor lives for him. What then is man living for? The Creation!

Hence, in a certain sense, the fruit is the creation. But God willed man to receive the Creation from Him, which, in God’s hands, is on a Tree of Life, as an expression of Divine Mysteries and love, and as a means of loving Him and others. To take the creation then, from this tree of life-giving meaning and love, is to divorce the Creation from the Creator’s design and to raise it to the level of ulitmate fulfillment of man, to take it as an end in and of itself, instead of as only a means to an end [which, again, is love, to give and receive intimately in intellect and will].

The supreme expression of the sacramental meaning of Creation is Marriage, which appropriately is mocked in the Whore. Also, God brought down water from heaven to baptize humanity in redemption, the False prophet reigns down fire from heaven, the antithesis.

The first lie then sets itself against Baptism, seeing as it denies the foundational components of Baptism: repentance (I WILL do God’s Will, I will not take the fruit) and faith (I DO believe in what God has said).

The second lie is accurately the whore, the antithesis of marriage: taking the most profound sacramental reality in Creation and divorcing it from love and meaning, taking the creation (the lustful pleasure of fornication) as an end by itself, which is what happens in all mortal sins: preferring a created good, divorced from its life giving meaning, to the Uncreated good, which is God. That is, the reprobate Marry the creation, rather than God.

The false prophet has two horns, like a Lamb, who has seven. Christ instituted seven sacraments, which are the horns of power in His Redemption of man. The devil plagiarizes the sacraments. Heretics retain only two sacraments, Baptism and Marriage. Hence, the dragon’s ultimate lies in the beginning, the basis of all iniquity in any great age of sin in history, are just the mocking plagiarization of the two sacraments left to heretics, making his lies, therefore, the “ultimate heresy.”

…

 

[Verita]

If I really wanted to bug you out, I would tell you to read carefully what the serpent said. Some “Gnostics” felt that the Serpent actually represented Christ and the old testament God represented the rule of Satan and that Jesus ended his rule, both at the tree and then later when he came to Earth. This point of view is also suprisingly put forth by the CS Lewis’ fiction work (the space trilogy) unlike his nonfiction, which is very conventional.

This (the part about Lewis’ space trilogy) is nonsense. I have no idea what aspect of the books he is referring to. Each planet has a ruling angel, Lucifer having been the ruling angel of Earth before he rebelled. Perhaps he is confusing that? I don’t know. It makes no sense.

There are a million different comparisons that can be made between Bible stories and myths of ancient cultures. But it doesn’t matter. There’s a very simple response to this. Just tell them that they are committing a logical fallacy called “post hoc ergo propter hoc” or “after this therefore because of this”. Just because something came into existence after something else does not mean it came into existence because of the first thing.

You can go back and forth for days about different versions of myths and when and where and whatnot. The fact is we don’t know nearly as much about the ancient past as we would like to. A lot of it is really guess work. And many ancient civilizations have dozens of conflicting myths. Take Egypt for example. How the world was created depends entirely upon which God’s priests are writing the story. And at least one of those myths could be compared with Genesis. But the Hebrews only had one story and it didn’t change over centuries. This only makes the Bible more credible, not less.