�ϻ�����Ӯ����

There's a mountain of evidence to support the theory that Genesis is a combination of at least a couple of books. I think like most of the books in the Bible, Genesis is an amalgamation of earlier (pagan) books.

This site is a good introduction to this concept to all the contradictions in the book (due to imperfect editing of the various books that inspired it) and all the "copyright infringements" to the earlier (pagan) books that it was lifted from:

And from this site, this quote is interesting:
"Most biblical scholars think the book is a confused melding of three distinct sources and an editor, making it highly self-contradictory. If you are a biblical literalist, those contradictions magically disappear."

So more than just a theory, it seems the consensus among the biblical scholars is that the Book of Genesis is NOT an original document.

Also, this quote here:
"Traditionally, Genesis and the other four Mosaic books were considered to have been written by Moses himself. Although a minority among conservative Christians still hold to this view, the greater part of modern scholarship believes that they were collected in the middle of the first millennium BCE from a number of older sources. Literary criticism and analysis suggests three sources for the original material which was then edited by a redactor."

I went to a Catholic college that required two semesters of theology as part of the core requirements. I took bible study classes taught by an ex-priest as literary criticism. Even in the 80s, we were learning about the Jahwist, Elohist, and Priestly authors of Genesis. It was a pretty interesting class.

i went to a seminary school and the theologist courses were the best. i loved picking apart religions and understanding their backgrounds. its fascinating what folks believe in...

I don't want to speak for the Jewish community, but what I will say is I have several Jewish friends who've told me it's a fairly common belief in their community that the Torah (basically the Old Testamant including Genesis) is a combination of various ancient books...Ones that pre-date Judaism I believe.

my jewish friends said the same when i hit them up for report time for class. i found it fascinatingly awesome ^_^. they were a bit perturbed by my incessant questioning but realised i was doing it for the sake of knowledge. i knew something was off about genesis and when local pastor blew me off i was determined to dig a bit deeper. ah fun times

I love the Jewish feminist take on the account of Lilith, in the Haddadah. The old testament, even the King James version has left over evidence of her story. Lilith was the first wife of Adam. She would not lie beneath him (after all she was made of the same clay he was), and flew away after uttering the ineffable name of God (note, only the perfect can...) And poor Adam was lonely so God made Eve from his rib.

That reminds me, Yahweh (El) had a wife, Asherah. She got purged out of their scriptures, probably in the mid to late first millennium bce.

Edward wrote: "But, if she wanted to get on top what's the big problem? Its less work for Adaam. ..."

Hahahaha!

Ed's back!

Edward wrote: "Mikhayla wrote: "I love the Jewish feminist take on the account of Lilith, in the Haddadah. The old testament, even the King James version has left over evidence of her story. Lilith was the first ..."

Like I said, I love the story of Lilith ;) She has been demonized and the Jewish story is that she comes at night and steals away the children of Eve (causing wet dreams-not approved of in the Jewish faith). It is believed that she will return in the end of days and become one with Eve. I think this little prophecy is coming true. I think feminism has been a great step toward ending the gender war. We can take turns being the top, right?

Oops, "children = seed," NM

Another possible indication of Genesis not being an original or singular document are the references to older/other Gods. How can there be one God (monotheism) and yet there were also Gods (polytheism). Either there's a God or there are Gods, but there can't be both.

Many believe these contradictions are residue from older Sumerian texts.

And another point of intrigue is that the Nephilim (ˈnɛfɨˌlɪm/ (Hebrew: נפילים‎) were offspring of the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" before the deluge.

Specifically this quote stands out:

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." -Genesis 6:4.

That's all very strange language for a book that is meant to affirm (according to the organized religions of Christianity and Judaism) that God created man and that was the end of story. And wasn't the only "Son of God" meant to be Jesus? Obviously multiple sons of God would not contradict Judaism (which does not believe Christ was the Messiah) but it would contradict Christianity.

James wrote: "Another possible indication of Genesis not being an original or singular document are the references to older/other Gods. How can there be one God (monotheism) and yet there were also Gods (polythe..."

That Genesis quote is great, ain't it.

This article here dovetails in with this thread I think:


How many times has the Bible been lost and had to be re-written?

How many foreign influences appeared to creep into the re-written Bible?

When the Jews came back to Israel from the exile in Babylon (about 520 BCE), they had picked up the Babylonian names of the months of the year.

They still use those names today even though the older Bible from the desert with Moses has numbered months, this all changed in a time span of 70 - 72 years of exile. The original names of the months are listed with the holidays that went with them in Numbers 28:16-39, an example is the first month, or the seventh month, that is how Yahweh and Moses labeled the months of the calendar.

Here are examples of just three names of the 12 currently being used. Nisan from Nisanu, Tishrei from Tashritu, and my favorite Tammuz from Dumuzi, (Dumuzi is the actual name of a Sumerian god. Tammuz is the Semitic pronunciation. I am not sure if the Rabbis know they are using the name of an ancient false god for one of their month’s names).

So when the final compilation of the Bible appeared during the years after returning from the Babylonian exile (around 520 BCE). The biblical authors incorporated their philosophy of one deity, Yahweh, into the copies of the scrolls. Whatever attributes a previous god may have had, was retained and given to Yahweh on paper.

If the story was holy and the deeds were attributed to Anu, Enki, Enlil, Inanna or Marduk it became the property of the Elohim or Yahweh. Probably Elohim was a clue to uncover those stories that showed an earlier influence from Mesopotamia. Why not just give one name to all the other gods mentioned and save much time?

Remember the Bible is trying to prove there is only one god, which is the point of the document. So we can accomplish this by putting all individual names into one general term, plural of course, and for the priests with the secret knowledge that know for themselves, we just incorporated the great stories the public knows and made them specific to our culture and our congregation. Who would know about the older tablets, who would know we borrowed?

This plan did work until the late 1880’s, and early 1900’s when archeologists started to finally dig out the texts in their original tablet form and the scholars translated them.

They were astonished to find so much of the source material for the Bible. This plan worked for more than 2,000 years, most people thought the biblical stories were original to the Bible. Even now people are astonished when I tell them there are stories of semi human/semi divine characters and stories of resurrection from 2000 - 3000 years before the time of Jesus and even Abraham.

The modern version of the Bible was probably read by Ezra (about 464 BCE) at the inauguration of the Second holy temple in Jerusalem.

Obviously scholars disagree with the exact dating.

A very good summary James. I particularly liked, "Why not just give one name to all the other gods mentioned and save much time?"

(And confusion.)

Harry wrote: "A very good summary James. I particularly liked, "Why not just give one name to all the other gods mentioned and save much time?"

(And confusion.)"

Thank you - but I didn't write any of that summary...that was the article in the link I provided.

I think the authors of Genesis and the Old Testament were trying to save time and confusion by giving one name to all the Gods of the Ancients. And they tried to present Genesis as an original document dictated by God himself. However, they left traces of the various older (polytheistic) texts Genesis was lifted/copyrighted/stolen from.

I've been reading about Aboriginal Myths, and the parallels to stories from Genesis are uncanny! Has anyone else noticed this?

Ted wrote: "I've been reading about Aboriginal Myths, and the parallels to stories from Genesis are uncanny! Has anyone else noticed this?"

I assume you mean the Australian Aboriginal people?
If so, I find that interesting considering the Aboriginal people are said to be 50,000 years old (and the world's oldest people?).

BTW, Elohim is plural. Just sayin'

Jim wrote: "BTW, Elohim is plural. Just sayin'"

Okay, perhaps you should let the writer of the article that I copied and pasted from know that, Jim. ;)

James Morcan wrote: "Ted wrote: "I've been reading about Aboriginal Myths, and the parallels to stories from Genesis are uncanny! Has anyone else noticed this?"

I assume you mean the Australian Aboriginal people?
If s..."

Yes, the Australian Aboriginal people. I'm reading the book, Aboriginal Myths, Tales of the Dreamtime, by A.W. Reed. Very interesting so far.

Tales of the Dreamtime - I think I might've read that long ago.
I found the songline phenomenon of the Aborigines fascinating.
As I understand it that's where the lines (like leylines) of the Earth make certain sounds which these people claim to be able to hear.

The Songlines

James Morcan wrote: "Tales of the Dreamtime - I think I might've read that long ago.
I found the songline phenomenon of the Aborigines fascinating.
As I understand it that's where the lines (like leylines) of the Earth..."
I haven't heard the leyline thing before, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. Ancient history is fascinating.

Jack wrote: "I don't know if Genisis is an original document but I do know that pretty much every culture had a story about a flood. Many cultures also talk about trees. The Norse World Tree, the Aztec have a t..."
It's amazing how many ties there are to a global flood. I didn't know about the common stories of the tree, but will surely look into it. I wrote a book based on Genesis 6:4 and found out way more than I bargained for. So many interesting stories swept under the rug.

Jack wrote: "cool, whats the name of the book? I will have to check it out."

Proof the Novel is the name and I did put a lot of time into researching for it. If you do read it, I would sure love to hear your opinion. If you do write one, please let me know and I'd love to read it or help you in any way.

Here's an excerpt from this article:

The Epic of Creation is the Sumerian version of how the world began and includes to some degree the formation of the other members of the solar system. The Sumerian tale is also likely the source of the earliest chapters of the Bible’s Genesis -- the latter which might be considered to be an Executive Summary of the original. Their similarities are highlighted in Comparative Religions (among other places), but the fact that Genesis was written during the Hebrews’ captivity in Babylon, c. 600 B.C.E. (where access to the Babylonian version of the Epic was readily available) is undoubtedly important.

The Sumerian Epic of Creation and Genesis both have the interesting feature of being scientifically accurate in terms of what was created first. In creating a world, you begin with energy (light), form the planet itself, divide the land from the water, grow grass, herbs, fruit (in that order), initiate day/night and seasons, create fish, fowl, cattle, creeping thing and beasts of the earth (again, in that order), until finally you create man. Then you get really clever and create woman. Okay, so it’s not all perfect!

But there is also the distinction between the cosmic creation and the earthly ones. In the Genesis version, the heavens were created separate from the Earth (by the means of a firmament), while the Sun and Moon were specifically mentioned as “two great lights”. In the Sumerian version -- which is decidedly less ego-earth-centric -- all of the other planets may be considered to have been described in various stages of grouping themselves into the current arrangement. It’s just that their names were often attributed to gods, instead of gods and planets!

The Annals of Earth provide much of the detail of the Epic of Creation (Episode One and/or Episode Two), along with comments on what the various phrases might actually mean. That is to say, the alternative more speculative version of their meaning. The idea is to translate mythology into scientifically plausible events, without being confined to the reigning paradigm wherein the ancients could not possibly have known anything!

The full text of the Epic of Creation (aka the Enuma Elish -- the title being the first words of the ancient text) are located at: with a second website located at (but with virtually no difference in its presentation of the epic).

Both websites are excellent, but the sacred-texts website is part of a much larger website which includes numerous sacred texts of the ancient Near East, including:

The Enuma Elish (The Epic of Creation)

Adapa and the food of Life

Descent of the Goddess Ishtar into the Lower World

(aka Descent into the Underworld)

The Seven Evil Spirits

The Code of Hammurabi

The Babylonian Story of the Deluge and the Epic of Gilgamesh

The Religion Of Babylonia And Assyria (by Theophilus G. Pinches)

Legends of Babylonia and Egypt (by Leonard W. King)

Another website is the traditional, mainstream way of interpreting the Epic; essentially, “Subsubsection of John Heise's 'Akkadian language', Chap. 3 (cuneiform texts) about the Babylonian Creation Epic, cuneiform text given, literary style, first primeval beings, explanation of the first few lines, etc.” John Heise does a credible, scholarly job of discussing the Enuma Elish, e.g. Enuma is translated as When, and Elish as High, i.e. “When in the Height, Heaven was not named...” However, this is not the interpretation that this website advocates.

Instead of assuming that we’re talking about mythological gods without a factual or real basis, the assumption here is that the so-called “gods and goddesses” within the Epic are descriptions of both the major players in our Solar System (Sun, Moon, Earth and the other planets) and the “gods” who are closely identified with these heavenly bodies.

The case of the planets being named is well presented by Zecharia Sitchin in his book, The 12th Planet. Sitchin makes it clear that the planetary description aspect of the Epic is justified, and that the planets and Gods were closely linked.

This is extremely important in the Sumerian version of Creation -- and probably why the Genesis version is shorter. One assumes, for example, that the Hebrew writers of Genesis (circa 600 B.C.E.) would not want multiple gods in their story, and furthermore would not want to limit its supreme deity to any one celestial body. Cut all the allusions to planets, and you don’t have as much to write about. There was also undoubtedly a strong inclination not to add anything to the creation story -- a potentially blasphemy.

The Epic of Creation begins with:

“THE FIRST TABLET

When in the height heaven was not named,

And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name,

And the primeval Apsu, who begat them,

And chaos, Tiamut, the mother of them both

Their waters were mingled together,

And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen;

When of the gods none had been called into being,

And none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained;

Then were created the gods in the midst of heaven,

Lahmu and Lahamu were called into being...

Ages increased,...”

There are other interpretations/translations, but this one identifies several of the players in the drama, from Apsu (Sun), Tiamut (a planet destined for destruction, but initially located at a distance from the Sun equivalent to the main bulk of the asteroid belt), to Lahmu and Lahamu (Mars and Venus). One that is not specifically named above (and translated there as “chaos”) is Mummu (aka Mercury).

Note that after these planets began to be formed, “Ages increased,”. In other words, time passed, before Jupiter and Saturn arrived on the scene (with the names Kishar and Anshar) along with a third planet, Gaga (emissary of Anshar -- probably Pluto). After more time, Uranus and Neptune (Anu and Ea -- the latter also known as Nudimmud) arrive. Everything is looking pretty good, until the intruder, Nibiru, arrives!

But that’s another story -- the one contained in the Annals of Earth -- but that's another webpage.

Well, stories like the Great Flood, Garden of Eden and the Book of Job clearly come from earlier, Babylonian sources (which are themselves copied from Sumerian sources) and it's obvious to anyone who has read these myths. The Jews did spend several lifetimes in captivity at Babylon so it was only natural that they adapted Babylonian myths to fit their own culture and religion- this has been a recurring theme in world mythology.

To play the devil's advocate (no pun intended!), the Babylonians or Sumerians never spoke of a single God, did they?
The Jews appear to be the first in history to have proposed monotheism.

James Morcan wrote: "To play the devil's advocate (no pun intended!), the Babylonians or Sumerians never spoke of a single God, did they?
The Jews appear to be the first in history to have proposed monotheism."

The first recorded person to advocate a monotheistic god is actually Ankhenaton, an Egyptian pharaoh.

As for the Sumerians, their myths are somewhat convoluted but many creation stories actually tell of tales of a single primordial god that gives birth or splits into two and create pantheons of gods- this concept is actually quite common and is part of the creation myths of Sumerians, Greeks and even Aztecs!

Oh ok, thanks for the clarification, John - you know more about this issue than me. But 'the origins of the Judeo-Christian faiths is definitely one that fascinates me nevertheless.

Many seemingly polytheistic religions were monotheistic to the inner circles. Egypt had a creator God (Ptah?) and all the others were aspects of the one to the initiated. Hinduism was either monotheistic or monist at various times and places.

There's a recurring theme of one level of understanding for people who just want to get on with their lives while being right with the gods and another level for the initiates who study and want to learn more. I think it's why there are grades in Western Freemasonry and other occult groups. The Corpus Hermeticum implies different teaching for different grades. There's Tat who we see achieve Gnosis for the first time, Asclepius, the advanced student, and Hermes, the master.

James Morcan wrote: "Oh ok, thanks for the clarification, John - you know more about this issue than me. But 'the origins of the Judeo-Christian faiths is definitely one that fascinates me nevertheless."

No worries, it fascinates me too! I'm currently writing a sci-fi series based on the similarities on world mythologies and there's just so much info out there. It's all so interesting.

The Dark Bible -- A Short History of the Bible

"The stories of the Bible evolved slowly over centuries before the existence of orthodox religions. Many belief cults spread stories and myths probably handed down by oral tradition from generation to generation before people wrote them down. Many of the stories originally came from Egyptian and Sumerian cults. All of these early religions practiced polytheism, including the early Hebrews. Some of the oldest records of the stories that later entered the Old Testament came from thousands of small cylinder seals depicting creation stories, excavated from the Mesopotamia period. These early artifacts and artworks (dated as early as 2500 B.C.E.) established the basis for the Garden of Eden stories a least a thousand years before it impacted Hebrew mythology."

James is spot on about the Bible. It has been rewritten, revised and translated many times over the centuries. The New Testament was cobbled together in the 300 A.D.'s. The old testament is a collection of truth, myths, fairy tales and epic poems. For new Testament interpretation I really like Bart D. Ehrman. He is outside the mainstream.



Another interesting site about Gnosticism worth visiting.


It seems that the more you study, the more the questions arise.

Yale has a free course in Old Testament studies:

A special shout out to James and Lance who do a helluva job of running the site and making us all think.

I don't know much about the Canaanites, but am looking forward to learning more...Including this book:

The Ancient Canaanites: The History of the Civilizations That Lived in Canaan Before the Israelites



I recall others have mentioned the Canaanites in passing in this group, so if anyone can share anything more, including how they may relate to the Bible mysteries we are uncovering in this thinktank, then please share.

Thanks!

David wrote: "A special shout out to James and Lance who do a helluva job of running the site and making us all think. ..."

Thanks David, but it's the learned members of this group that make it really special.
We just got lucky in attracting people like yourself :)
James

It is amusing to see a continuing discussion on the originality of the Bible. My research and writing concerns the forgotten knowledge of the Sumerians and Ancient Egyptians who predated Christianity by thousands of years and can still be found in surviving writings. Remember that Moses is said to have originated from Egypt so it should not be surprising that much of the ancient Egyptian knowledge made its way into the derivative beliefs of the Jews and Christians.

My book Awakening Higher Consciousness: Guidance from Ancient Egypt and Sumer () provides insights into the not- so-lost knowledge.

Cheers,
Paul Boudreau

Notes on the Book of Genesis

Moses and Monotheism

How about this book by Sigmund Freud which claims Moses was an Egyptian, not a Jew.

This volume contains Freud's speculations on various aspects of religion, on the basis of which he explains certain characteristics of the Jewish people in their relations with the Christians. From an intensive study of the Moses legend, Freud comes to the startling conclusion that Moses himself was an Egyptian who brought from his native country the religion he gave to the Jews. He accepts the hypothesis that Moses was murdered in the wilderness, but that his memory was cherished by the people & that his religious doctrine ultimately triumphed. Freud develops his general theory of monotheism, which enables him to throw light on the development of Judaism & Christianity.

James wrote: "Moses and Monotheism

How about this book by Sigmund Freud which claims Moses was an Egyptian, not a Jew.

This volume contains Freud's speculations on various aspects o..."


Jesus: Last of the Pharaohs and Secrets Of The Exodus: Did The Pharaohs Write The Bible? are pretty good books which explore that idea further.

The first one would actually make sense: This fascinating reference fuels the passionate debate about the biblical Exodus with a provocative thesis: Not only was Moses an Egyptian but so were the Hebrew people who followed him to Canaan. Through linguistic, philologic, and religious explorations, the authors prove that the "Chosen People" were not slaves from a foreign country but high-ranking Egyptian priests and the adherents of the monotheist pharaoh Akhenaton. During a counterrevolution against monotheism, his followers were forced to move to the Egyptian province of Canaan. Secrets of the Exodus is a controversial, thought-provoking guide guaranteed to shake many beliefs both in the Jewish and Christian communities

So, does the time frame work with this chap?

Akhenaten (/ˌækəˈnɑːtən/;[1] also spelled Echnaton,[7] Akhenaton,[8] Ikhnaton,[9] and Khuenaten;[10][11] meaning "Effective for Aten") known before the fifth year of his reign as Amenhotep IV (sometimes given its Greek form, Amenophis IV, and meaning "Amun Is Satisfied"), was an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty who ruled for 17 years and died perhaps in 1336 BC or 1334 BC. He is especially noted for abandoning traditional Egyptian polytheism and introducing worship centered on the Aten, which is sometimes described as monolatristic, henotheistic, or even quasi-monotheistic. An early inscription likens the Aten to the sun as compared to stars, and later official language avoids calling the Aten a god, giving the solar deity a status above mere gods.
Akhenaten tried to bring about a departure from traditional religion, yet in the end it would not be accepted. After his death, his monuments were dismantled and hidden, his statues were terminated and his name was not to be included in the king lists.[12] Traditional religious practice was gradually restored, and when some dozen years later rulers without clear rights of succession from the 18th Dynasty founded a new dynasty, they discredited Akhenaten and his immediate successors, referring to Akhenaten himself as "the enemy" or "that criminal" in archival records.[13]

Good catch James

A quote from them"A reading of both versions of the Bible reveals that there were two classes of people who were involved in the Exodus. There were the Yahuds, the priestly class, and there were the Children of Israel, the commoners, the "multitudes"...the Aramaic Bible makes a clear distinction between the Hebrews (Children of Israel) and the Yahuds...When the people of the Exodus reached Canaan, the Yahuds established themselves as the Kingdom of Judah and the multitude formed the Kingdom of Israel

Messod and Roger Sabbah / Secret of the Exodus (quoted by Michael Tsarion)"

There's allegedly an oral tradition in Egypt that Khemit originally consisted of something like 47 tribes. 12 of those became the Hebrews, others founded other societies.

Moses certainly sounds like an Egyptian name. I don't know enough about linguistics to know if Hebrew and Aramaic could have plausibly come from Egyptian. I only know they are Afro-Asiatic languages and probably from the same branch.

Branching off from that, have you guys ever figured out why some African peoples also call themselves Jews?

And then there are the Rastafarians of Ethiopia who don't exactly call themselves Jews to my knowledge, but they talk a lot about Zion or Zionism and follow a lot of the beliefs of Judaism.

James wrote: "Branching off from that, have you guys ever figured out why some African peoples also call themselves Jews?

And then there are the Rastafarians of Ethiopia who don't exactly call themselves Jews ..."


Because the Jews actually are in Africa, when the Lord dividing the Jews into 12 divisions and Jews spread all over the world

And the Masons were also Jews, but an anomaly from the rest of the Jews so they call themselves (instrument 13)

The Masons are Jews?

James wrote: "The Masons are Jews?"

Yes of cours, Because the founder of the Masons are the Knights Templar

The knight Templars are intractable group of Christian crusaders, They followed the Jewish religion, they worship demons
So the Inquisition in Europe burned category them

Are you aware during the Christian Crusades the biggest group they slaughtered after Muslims were Jews?

Yup ,War broke out between the Crusaders and the knights Templar, so separated the templar from the Crusaders, then the Crusaders began to kill and torture of all Jews loyal to the Knights Templar

So Masons are the class that controls the Jews, and had incited the occupation of Palestine to demolish Al-Aqsa on the pretext that the original Bible buried under Al-Aqsa

The Masons "control the Jews"...ha!
I think you've fallen for anti-Semitic propaganda.

Beware, most of the info on Jews coming out of Palestine, which I see you mention, and the entire Middle East, is anti-Semitic claptrap...

Well, Even if I was the one of anti-Semitic (although I am not anti-Semitic)
But why are you defending them , and why are you reject their relationship with the Masons....


Can you tell me why the Jews occupied the Palestine, and why been trying for more than 60 years to demolish Al-Aqsa?

This is not anti-Semitic, but it is the truth