The Bible Was Actually Written By Sumerians In 400 BC

blah blah blah

The Sumerians were the forgotten people of the Bible that hardly get mentioned. Bit like writing the History of the 20th Century without mentioning the USA.

Proof the Sumerians didn't write it.

"Origins of the Earliest Scripture
Prehistory to 1850 B.C.E.
This book is an excellent survey of the current state of Old Testament archaeology. It will be of considerable interest to both skeptic and apologist alike!

Get it here!
The Bible Unearthed : Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and The Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, published 2001.
This book was a best-seller on the New York Times best seller list and for good reason: it traces the fascinating origins of the Christian, Judaic and Islamic god back to its Canaanite and Mesopotamian roots. Good read!

Get it here!
A History of God: The 4,000 Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam by Karen Armstrong, published 1994.
Scholars have traced the roots of many of the Old Testament stories to the ancient, pagan myths of the ancient Mesopotamian cultures. In the Fertile Crescent, the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, in present-day Iraq, gave birth to some of the worlds first civilizations.

In this early flowering of civilization, many religious myths abounded, seeking to explain what was then unexplainable. From this context comes the oldest complete literary work we have, the age of which we are certain, dating back at least 7,000 years. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a lengthy narrative of heroic mythology that incorporates many of the religious myths of Mesopotamia, and it is the earliest complete literary work that has survived.

Many of the stories in that epic were eventually incorporated into the book of Genesis. Borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh are stories of the creation of man in a wondrous garden, the introduction of evil into a naive world, and the story of a great flood brought on by the wickedness of man, that flooded the whole world.

In this Mesopotamian basin civilization, known to us today as the Chaldean Empire, tribal alliances that predated the amalgamation into a single empire, continued to exist and flourish. Many were allied to the palace, many opposed, all retained elements of their pre-conquest cultures.

The patriarchs first appear in our story with the journey of one of them, Abraham, who, the story tells us, led members of his tribe from the city of Ur, west towards the Mediterranean, to the "promised land" of Canaan, sometime between the 19th and 18th centuries B.C.E. Or so the story goes.

The problem is that we don't really have any good archeaological evidence to support the Abraham story, and there is much archaeological evidence to contradict it. The land where Abraham supposedly settled, the southern highlands of Palestine (from Jerusalem south the the Valley of Beersheba) is very sparse in archaeological evidence from this period. It is clear from the archaeological record that its population was extremely sparse - no more than a few hundred people in the entire region, and the sole occupants of the area during this time were nomadic pastoralists, much like the Bedouin of the region today. We know from clear archaeological evidence that the peoples known as the Phillistines never even entered the region until the 12th century B.C.E., and the "city of Gerar" in which Isaac, the son of Abraham, had his encounter with Abimelech, the "king of the Phillistines" (in Genesis 26:1) was in fact a tiny, insignificant rural village up until the 8th century B.C.E. It couldn't have been the capital of the regional king of a people who didn't yet exist!

This isn't the only problem with the account of the Age of the Patriarchs, either. There's the problem of the camels. We know from archaeological evidence that camels weren't domesticated until about the late second millenium B.C.E., and that they weren't widely used as beasts of burden until about 1000 B.C.E. - long after the Age of the Patriarchs. And then there's the problem of the cargo carried by the camels - "gum, balm and myrrh," which were products of Arabia - and trade with Arabia didn't begin until the era of Assyrian hegemony in the region, beginning in the 8th century B.C.E.

Yet another problem is Jacob's marriage with Leah and Rachel, and his relationship with his uncle, Laban, all of whom are described as being Arameans. This ethnic group does not appear in the archeological record prior to 1100 B.C.E., and not a significant group until the 9th century B.C.E.

Yet influences from the east must have been, because we have evidence of worship of their gods and goddesses. The heiarchy of gods and goddesses who included Baal, the god of storms, who made the land fertile, and Lotan, the seven-headed dragon, known to Old Testament readers as Leviathan. There is Yam Nahar, the god of the seas and rivers, and other pantheons and heiarchies of gods and goddesses.1 Reigning over them all was El, the king of the gods, ruler of the pantheon. Remember the name, we'll encounter it again."

Balance of article: [link to www.bidstrup.com]

The difference between verifiable history and created "memory."

Funny how OP and archaeologists always try to disprove the Bible but it will always outlast them. It is the most accurate information of the past then anything ever. I know it hurts OP but I'm sure your hemorrhoids hurt more.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure what I'm laughing at more here, your pre-school grammar, or your ridiculous assertion.

We KNOW that the first Nicaean Council essentially edited and vetted the documents which were compiled into the "Holy Bible..." this is undisputed fact. In and of ITSELF, that tells us that the Bible is a DIRECTED document, not an historically relevant text. The utter lack of anything resembling intelligence that you people use for argument simply baffles me.

^^^

What he said. Go back far enough and you'll find its the work of mystery Babylon

+1

And you're probably thinking the bible was originally written in English too, I suppose.

The sheer audacity of truth?

Nah,

The current bible chapters were selected around 200 after christ.

By people who had a certain idea about how a 'church' should be ruled: shortminded, dogmatic, not to much influence of women.

In the USA nowadays you still see a lot of lunatics defending that kind of human mess, like its the word of 'god'.

You will be silenced.

We don't know shit!

We don't even know what we are?

We live in outer space on a rock next to this hot ball of fire.

This is like some sort of adv world of war craft.

Hey OP, Jesus man!

Jeezuz!

And Gilgamesh!

THIS.

The real first commandment is Thou shalt not think.

Basically, yeah.

The pagan Sumer account does not tell of real events, while Genesis is confirmed with history and the sciences as the oldest text and religion on the planet, from creation.

The biblical religion has remained unchanged for thousands of years, while all pagan religions have changed with the rise and fall of their empires and culture.

Claim:
The Sumer tablets are the oldest text.

Reply:
Understand how textual dating is done: the physical dating of an archeological relic does not date the original text, which is dated by historic events and persons recorded in the text and confirmed with the sciences.

"The oldest known tablets written in stone," means little, as original biblical texts were copied to parchment repeatedly and the originals destroyed as they were used to the point of being worn out and useless. But by this time there were thousands of copies so originals were unimportant. Older scripture has no validity over the majority text in agreement: Majority coming from different parts of the world, all in agreement. This is what is found with the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament and Hebrew Masoretic Old Testament, King James Version manuscripts. Oldest known does not mean more credible or reliable in textual criticism, only that the originals were destroyed, lost or possibly being kept from us.

The pagan Sumer tablets do not tell of real events, while the books of the Bible are confirmed repeatedly with HISTORY and SCIENCE.

Genesis has stories far older than the flood, compiled by Moses including many prophecies precluding anything but devinely inspired Word of GOD!


Moses possibly edited Genesis from ten firsthand witnesses


TOLEDOTH THEORY

In recent years a much better insight into the origin of Genesis has emerged. As ancient Near Eastern libraries have been unearthed and their contents deciphered, many insights into biblical times have been gained. In particular, tablets from before the time of Moses in the area of Mesopotamia (where Abraham hailed from) were noted to frequently contain a colophon – a formula of sorts, at the close of the tablet. This is similar to modern customs of ending a letter with a formula like "Sincerely yours, (Name)".

Often these tablets were family records or king-lists giving the ancestry of a person. The Hebrew term for generations is toledoth. These tablets would contain a colophon describing who had written the tablet or whose history it recorded. Scholars recognized that these colophons were similar in structure to toledoth phrases in Genesis:

1) "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created." (Genesis 2:4)

2) "This is the book of the generations of Adam." (Genesis 5:1)

3) "These are the generations of Noah." (Genesis 6:9)

4) "Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth." (Genesis 10:1)

5) "These are the generations of Shem." (Genesis 11:10)

6) "Now these are the generations of Terah." (Genesis 11:27)

7) "And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham's son." (Genesis 25:19)

8) "This is the account of Abraham's son Ishmael." (Genesis 25:12)

9) "This is the account of Esau (that is, Edom)." (Genesis 36:1)

10) "These are the generations of Jacob." (Genesis 37:2)

The implication of these colophons in Genesis is that they separate Genesis into distinct source documents each dating from the period of the person named in them. These source documents were handed down from father to son until the time of Moses, when they were edited together to form the book of Genesis under divine inspiration. In almost every case the logical author for each document would be the person named in the colophon itself. The statements immediately following each colophon would be the beginning of the next tablet; for example, Genesis 2:4 reads "When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens…" beginning Adam’s story.
[link to www.rae.org]
[link to www.trueorigin.org]
[link to www.dtl.org]
[link to www.specialtyinterests.net]
Nimrod and Babylon
[link to amazingdiscoveries.org]
Textual manuscript criticism
[link to www.biblebelievers.com]

Possibly???

Or, possibly, he didn't.



Try again.

The Preserved Word of God is written in English. You can probably get it your nearest gas station or dollar store.. its known as the KJB or the King James Bible. There is a reason for all the imitations and single clay tablets that say something different.. and it aint cause they are the truth.

Abraham was chosen from that region, no? He once was ruled by those laws?

Righteous ignorance is bliss...

...especially to behold!

Truly!

What first of all matter is: the Bible was written and selected by human......Males who had a certain view of society.

The ones who think 'gods' write books are mentally ill.

Totally agree!