“In reality, Muhammad wasn’t a perfect man. According to Qur’an scripture, he was only a man. In Sūrah
18:110, and in other parts of the Qur’an, Muhammad is commanded by Allah: “Say, I am but a man like
yourselves.” No where in the Qur’an is Muhammad said to be sinless. Instead, Allah tells Muhammad that
he is no different than any other man. I continued my studies with Aakifah, because as a woman, she was
more emotional to my needs of seeking out the truth of all religions. But after eight months of studying
with her, she too, became frustrated with me. In a very soft tone, she said, “It seems like you spend more
time trying to find fault in Islam, than you trying finding favor in Allah.” I told her she was absolutely right. I
explained, in order for one to except a religious faith, one must make sure that that “Faith,” was fully
observing God’s Commands. I told her the easiest way for a person to investigate any faith, is not by
following the crowd belonging to a particular faith, but yet seek out the faults first, before excepting and
fellowshipping with the crowds.“**

Link to Archive

 

**Personal note, literally the “limbo zone” where I existed for decades. 

The “Genesis” of the Occult is basically the Genesis of humanity. With that being said lets look at some Mysteries of Masonry as revealed to us by one of their own in Ancient Mysteries and Modern Masonry. This can be considered under the body of work of Christian Mysteries.  

In the last lecture we examined the testimonies of Christ and His Apostles, and found that they had an inner teaching, a deep spiritual knowledge, which was not imparted to the masses.
We shall now proceed to the history of the early church in which we find that the Mysteries, as established by Christ, constituted a definite institution in the early Christian centuries.
There were two traditions of the Christian Gnosis —the Gnostic, which recognized the Christian Gnosis as only a part of the General Gnosis, and the orthodox, which held to the exclusive character of the Christian Gnosis.
Let us first consider the Gnostics. The very meaning of the word Gnostic is to know. The Gnostics were the first philosophers and theologians of the Christian Church; they had an inner esoteric teaching which they claimed came direct from Jesus and the Apostles. These philosophers were not only the most cultured in the Christian ranks, but were zealous workers in their faith; they endeavored to formulate Christianity as a universal philosophy. They lived strictly and followed the path of righteousness, striving by every means to purify themselves and to realize by daily practice the teachings of the Master, seeking always the science of realities—the knowledge of God, hence wisdom was their goal and spiritual things their study. They looked at the problem of cosmogony and anthropogeny from above, and in this they may have been as reasonable in their proper domain as the modern scientist who looks at the problem from below. Until the middle of the second century, at least, they continued a part of the General Christian body, but at last the narrowness and bigotry of those who followed the outer tradition succeeded in having them denounced as heretics; and this chiefly for contending that the teachings of Christ contained a wisdom that transcended the comprehension of the multitude.

Head on over to the Department of State website and retrieve for yourself the Department of State FOIA Log of 2018, which is a document that shows all the requests for information via the Freedom of Information Act. This is a important clue, document of provenance in our search for truth. Here, basically in plain sight we have a request made for information to a resurrection chamber of Gilgames=Nimrod, The Occult Baal of Baals! This request although just a crumb on the surface becomes an important real world link to our investigation. From my understanding this was first an email to Hillary Clinton, and then the request was made by this Denetra D Senigar person. And if you don’t know by now that Hillary Clinton is high Occult Priestess consider yourself informed.

US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
FOIA – Freedom of Information Act

In the Department of State FOIA log of 2018: pg470
Document Date: 3/21/2019
Posted in the Virtual Reading Room: 9/3/2020
Request Reference: F-2019-02111
Request Name: Denetra D Senigar

Subject: Requesting documents pertaining to the resurrection chamber of Gilgamesh, the locationof his body and the location of the buried Nephilim

http://www.babylonrisingblog.com/Nephilim4.html

Please follow the link above to read the full work of Rob Skiba II on Babylon, Nephilim and Biblical accounts of our origin story.

TIMING IS EVERYTHING

I know many believe that it took Noah 120 years to build the ark, but I would like to point out that it was just a big box. Granted, it had three decks and lots of compartments within it, but do you really think it took Noah and sons that long to do build such a relatively simple structure? Jasher tells us it actually only took them five years.
And Noah rose up, and he made the ark, in the place where God had commanded him, and Noah did as God had ordered him. In his five hundred and ninety-fifth year Noah commenced to make the ark, and he made the ark in five years, as the Lord had commanded.
(Jasher 5:33,34)
In Genesis 6:3, God announced that there would be 120 years left for men to repent. Thus, Noah preached for at least 115 of those years before God finally told him that it was time to start building the ark. Such a construction project likely drew a lot of attention, so naturally, Noah would have continued to preach as he worked.
With only five more years left to save those who were still tamim, Noah and his sons got busy and as we saw, according to Jasher it took them exactly five years to complete the project. After the work was done, one thing remained: Noah had to pick three wives for his three sons.
Then Noah took the three daughters of Eliakim, son of Methuselah, for wives for his sons, as the Lord had commanded Noah. And it was at that time Methuselah the son of Enoch died, nine hundred and sixty years old was he, at his death.
(Jasher 5:35,36)
Here we see that the three wives were not chosen until after the ark was completed, roughly seven days before the Flood. Some may resist this as being unbiblical since Genesis doesn’t say that, so for the sake of argument, let’s look at what Genesis does say:
And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.

And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee. (Genesis 6:12-18)

Without making any assumptions, we see that there is a progression of events given in a specific order in Genesis, which is confirmed and elaborated on in the synchronized, biblically-endorsed, extra-biblical texts. If we are to assume Genesis is written in chronological order, following a linear progression of events, we see the same thing: Earth and all flesh becomes corrupted, violence fills the earth, God decides to destroy it, He gives the instructions for how to build the ark and finally, for the first time, the wives of Noah’s sons are mentioned. There is no mention of them prior and verse 18 follows verse 12, therefore the chronology given in Genesis is exactly the same as that given in Jasher. In the latter, there is no contradiction, only elaboration.

In showing how Genesis syncs up with the books of 1 Enoch, Jasher and Jubilees, it may be summarized as follows:

Genesis 6:1-4 –> Angels mating with humans.
Syncs with: 1 Enoch 6:1 – 7:2 and Jubilees 5:1 (see also recap of 7:21-23)
Genesis 6:5-7 –> Shows how God feels about the resulting violence.
Syncs with: 1 Enoch 7:3-6 and Jubilees 5:2-4
Genesis 6:8-10 –> Reveal how Noah and his sons were genetically pure.
Syncs with: Jasher 4:12-15 (see also Jasher 5:13-17) and Jubilees 5:5
Genesis 6:11,12 –> Earth and all flesh becomes corrupted.
Syncs with: Jasher 4:16-18 and Jubilees 5:19
Genesis 6:13-17 –> God grows increasingly angry and tells Noah to build the ark and how to do it.
Syncs with: Jasher 4:19-21 & 5:25-29 and Jubilees 5:21,22
Genesis 6:18 –> First mention of the wives of Noah’s three sons.
Syncs with: Jasher 5:32-36 (Noah chose the three wives just 7 days before the Flood!)
The text seems to show quite plainly that the wives were a late addition in the chronology and since they came after the corruption of “all flesh,” we have to acknowledge that Noah’s choices for wives must have been rather limited indeed. All things considered, I’d say he did a pretty good job.
How long of a time period are we talking about between Genesis 6:1 and verse 18? Well, let’s look at the pre-Flood timeline chart again. In Figure 14, we see that the Watchers came down in the days of Jared, which was at about 3550 BC. Then, 500 years later, the first generation Nephilim hybrids were destroyed and the Watchers were judged shortly thereafter. Enoch continued to preach for a short time and then he was raptured around 3015 BC — about 65 years prior to Noah’s birth, which was around 2950 BC.

Since the ancient Hebrew (extra-biblical) texts referred to a corruption of flesh beginning “in the latter days of Methusaleh” and Genesis says that Noah preached for 120 years, we’d probably be safe in saying that the following represents a pretty accurate timeline:

Noah was found to be genetically pure (vs 8,9) – at least 120 years before the Flood.
Noah had three genetically pure sons (vs 10) – 100 years before the Flood (Jasher 5:13-18 says that Noah took a wife when he was 498 years old and they had his sons a few years later when he was 500 – 502 years old – see also Genesis 5:32 for confirmation of that age).
Violence and corruption erupts in the earth (vs 11) – sometime within the 100 years prior to the Flood.
ALL flesh becomes corrupted (vs 12) – sometime within the 100 years prior to the Flood.
God announces that He is going to destroy the world by Flood (vs 13) – sometime between 120 to 5 years prior to the Flood.
God instructs Noah on how to build the Ark (vs 14-16) -Jasher 5:34 says that Noah commenced to make the Ark five years before the Flood and that it took him that long to build it. Presumably his now 95 year old (young) sons helped him with the building and thus would have had very little time for marriage. Jasher 5:35,36 confirms this when it says that Noah picked the three wives for his sons literally right around the same time that Methusaleh died — which was just seven days prior to the Flood. So it appears that there was both a funeral and a wedding at the same time!
God says He is going to destroy the whole earth, but will preserve Noah, his wife, his sons and his son’s wives (vs 17-18) — God’s promise right before the Flood waters came (when Noah was 600 yrs old).
Based on the above, easily verifiable timeline, there is little need for assumptions. The texts say what they say. All flesh had become corrupted and Noah didn’t pick the three wives for his three sons until the very end, during the last few days before the Flood waters came. So could it be that those three women might have fallen into the category of those whose flesh had been corrupted? Genesis, Jasher and Jubilees would lead us to believe that they were. Naturally, that means God allowed corrupted DNA onto the ark.

THAT’S ABSURD!

My detractors say that my position regarding Nephilim genetics possibly surviving in any member of Noah’s crew is absurd and makes no sense. They ask, “If God had to wipe out the whole world with a Flood, why would He allow any Nephilim genetics to survive on the ark?”
They are focusing on the symptom not the root cause. Why they can’t see that their position is even more absurd, I will never know. God had to destroy the whole world because of what the Watchers and their offspring did. His entire Creation had become completely corrupted. That was the reason for the Flood! So, if that’s the case, why would God simply allow the same thing to happen again? What? Was the Flood just a half-time show that the Watchers watched as the playing field was washed clean? Was God just wiping everything out so they could simply pick up where they left off and start all over again almost immediately after the ground was dry? No. That makes absolutely no sense at all.
Whereas, it makes perfect sense why God may have allowed microscopic genetic codes (i.e. a remnant of genetic information) to survive — just long enough for His people to wipe them out. Why? Because as we will soon see, it was through the heroic acts of the Hebrew people that the whole post-Flood world came to fear them and YHVH, their God — the one true God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God got the glory through His chosen people and this new nation of “giant slayers” stood as a testimony to all other nations of the awesome power and truth of the living Creator of heaven and earth.
Now before they lay down, she came up to them on the roof, and said to the men, “ I know that the Lord has given you the land, and that the terror of you has fallen on us, and that all the inhabitants of the land have melted away before you. For we have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites who were beyond the Jordan, to Sihon and Og, whom you utterly destroyed. When we heard it, our hearts melted and no courage remained in any man any longer because of you; for the Lord your God, He is God in heaven above and on earth beneath. (Joshua 2:8-11)

When you consider what this tiny nation did to entire cultures of massive post-Flood giants, it is very easy to see why God “allowed” Nephilim genetics to survive — long enough to be wiped out by His people. In so doing, God demonstrated to the world and to the fallen angels what people in right relationship with Him can do.

X AND Y CHROMOSOMES
We know from Genesis that God created man in His own image and likeness. This is most interesting if we take that notion down to the genetic level. I began to wonder, does God have chromosomes? Considering the fact that Adam was created in His likeness, it would seem so.
A man has both X and Y chromosomes. Women lack the Y chromosome and instead have two X chromosomes. So when God took Eve “out of Adam” it would appear that God replicated the X chromosome. When the Holy Spirit “overshadowed” Mary and impregnated her with the “seed” that would germinate her egg, thus producing the promised Messiah, He added His Y to her X in order to produce the male child.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
(Matthew 1:18)

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
(Luke 1:34,35)
In both cases, the first Adam and the “Second Adam” were given their Y chromosome from God Himself. I believe this is absolutely critical in understanding the value of all of the men on Noah’s ark being pure and why “tainted genes” in the women are far less of a problem than what you can expect from the notion of multiple incursions, where male angels are reintroducing bad Y chromosomes into the gene pool.
We know from Scripture that Eve’s sin did not cause the downfall of the human race. It was only when Adam took a bite of the “forbidden fruit” that sin entered the world.
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5:12)
When Adam sinned, the human race fell. Sin entered the world through a man, therefore sin had to be paid for by a man. This is why God didn’t have an “only begotten daughter” to save mankind, but rather a son.
But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. (Romans 5:15-17 NASB)
The interesting thing about the Y chromosome, is it can only come from a father. Thus, every Y chromosome in existence today had to have come from fathers, which can be traced all the way back to Noah; the one genetically pure male whose untainted Y chromosome could be traced all the way back to Adam; the man who received the first Y chromosome directly from God Himself.
In order for mankind to eventually be saved, there would have to be a pure Y chromosome genetic line going all the way back to Adam. To achieve this, God made absolutely certain that the first generation Nephilim offspring who received their Y chromosomes from angels would be killed off within 500 years of their birth.

And to Gabriel said the Lord: ‘Proceed against the bastards and the reprobates, and against the children of fornication: and destroy [the children of fornication and] the children of the Watchers from amongst men [and cause them to go forth]: send them one against the other that they may destroy each other in battle: for length of days shall they not have. And no request that they (i.e. their fathers) make of thee shall be granted unto their fathers on their
behalf; for they hope to live an eternal life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years.’
(1 Enoch 10:9,10)
This same story is given in the book of Jubilees as well:
And against their sons went forth a command from before His mouth that they should be killed with the sword, and be removed from under heaven. And He said “My spirit will not always abide on man; for they also are flesh and their days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” And He sent His sword into their midst that each should slay his neighbor, and they began to slay each other till they all fell by the sword and were destroyed from the earth. And their fathers were witnesses (of their destruction), and after this they were bound in the depths of the earth for ever, until the day of the great condemnation when judgment is executed on all those who have corrupted their ways and their works before the Lord. And He destroyed all from their places, and there was not left one of them whom He judged not according to all their wickedness. (Jubilees 5:7-11)

Here again, we see the pre-Flood timeline, illustrating the time period wherein the first generation offspring of the Watchers lived and died. I would liken that first group to the Titans of Greek mythology. If that is an accurate assumption, let’s look at the possibilities concerning other generations of Nephilim.
MULTIPLE GENERATIONS OF NEPHILIM

I think it is a reasonable assumption to say that the first generation offspring of the Watchers may have had offspring themselves during the 500 year timeframe that they lived. Some disagree with that notion altogether, suggesting that the Nephilim were sterile. But I reject that idea based on numerous Scriptures that talk about giants who were sons of other giants. Take Numbers 13:33 for instance. This text clearly states that the sons of Anak were Nephilim who came of (or from) other Nephilim:

And there we saw the giants [Nephilim], the sons of Anak, which come of the giants [Nephilim]: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
(Numbers 13:33)
The giants the Hebrew spies saw are here described as being the offspring of Anak, who was himself the son of a giant named Arba. For Nephilim to be producing other Nephilim, clearly they could not have been sterile! 2 Samuel 21:16-22 also mentions Ishbibenob and Saph who were described as “sons of the giant.” Another man of great stature, with six fingers and toes was likewise described as one who “also was born to the giant.” In all, we read about four giants (some say these were all the brothers of Goliath) who were killed by David and his mighty men.
These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants.
(2 Samuel 12:22)

How can giants be born to other giants if the Nephilim are supposedly sterile? I don’t know where that line of thinking got started, but clearly it is not supported by the biblical text.
We also see evidence of a variety of Nephilim types both in the Hebrew as well as pagan extra-Biblical texts. For instance, the book of Jubilees talks about Nephilim offspring known as the Elioud (or Eljo):
And they begat sons the Nâphîdîm, and they were all unlike, and they devoured one another: and the Giants slew the Nâphîl, and the Nâphîl slew the Eljô, and the Eljô mankind, and one man another. (Jubilees 7:22)
In the Greek version of 1 Enoch, we learned that the Greek manuscripts vary considerably from the Ethiopic text, especially in 1 Enoch 7:1-3 where we find the following added to that section:
“And they [the women] bore to them [the Watchers] three races-first, the great giants. The giants brought forth the Naphilim, and the Naphilim brought forth the Elioud. And they existed, increasing in power according to their greatness.”
In the above account, it appears that the first generation offspring of angels and humans were simply called the “great giants” (which I believe were the Greek Titans) and that it was their offspring who were called the Nephilim (possibly the Olympians) from whom came the Elioud (these could be the demigods of Greek mythology, such as Hercules). Whatever the case may be, we see both in Jubilees as well as in 1 Enoch that there were generations of offspring that came from the original children of the Watchers. I believe this same idea is reflected in the Sumerian myths as the difference between the Anunnaki and the Igigi, and as stated above, in the Greek myths as the difference between Titans, Olympians and the demigods. This then raises another question:

WERE THERE FEMALE NEPHILIM TOO?

We’ve already addressed a number of misconceptions concerning Nephilim, but I want to tackle another one here. Many not only say that the Nephilim were all sterile, but also that they were all male. Is that true? We don’t see any direct evidence for female giants, Nephilim or Elioud/Eljo in Scripture (as in a description of any female giants interacting with the Israelites). We do however find indirect references from which we may infer that female offspring of “like kind” may have existed. Indeed, I believe they did. Why else would God order the “utter destruction” of men, women and children in some of Israel’s military campaigns to conquer the land of Canaan?
All these cities were fenced with high walls, gates, and bars; beside unwalled towns a great many. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. (Deuteronomy 3:5-7)

When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. (Deuteronomy 7:1-3)
Either God is quite prejudice and into random acts of genocide, or He has a legitimate reason for wanting even the women and children (which were usually taken as “spoils of war”) to be utterly destroyed along with the men.
If we compare the Hebrew narratives to that of the Greeks, we see that there certainly were female “goddesses” that were every bit as famous as their male counterparts. At least one of these even found her way into canonized Scriptures:
And when the town clerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter? (Acts 19:35)
Diana was the Roman equivalent of the Greek goddess Artemis, who, according to the mythology was the sister of Apollo and daughter of Zeus. We’ve already discussed who Apollo really was/is in Book 1, so I won’t spend time on him here. But since Artemis/Diana was his sister and also associated with the hunt, the moon and birthing (among other attributes), it is easy to see that her Assyrian equivalent was in reality Nimrod’s sister Semiramis, who was known as Ishtar to the Mesopotamians, Isis to the Egyptians, Astarte in the Northwestern Semetic regions, and Inanna to the Sumerians.

She had temples at Sidon and Tyre, and the Philistines of Askelon apparently venerated her as well. She was everywhere! In North Africa, she was known as Tanith, which means the “Face of Baal” signifying that she was his consort. And in the land of Canaan, she was known as Ashtoreth and even King Solomon went after her:
For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father.
(1 Kings 11:4,5)
Solomon built a high-place for her near Jerusalem which lasted until the time of King Josiah, who finally tore it down. The extent of her cult among the Israelites is proven by numerous biblical references and frequent representations (such as Asherah poles) of the deity in various forms and names all related to the same individual.

The Encyclopedia Britannica has the following to say concerning this individual under the name Ishtar:
“As the great nature-goddess, the attributes of fertility and reproduction are characteristically hers, as also the accompanying immorality which originally, perhaps, was often nothing more than primitive magic. As patroness of the hunt, later identification with Artemis was inevitable. Hence the consequent fusion with Aphrodite, Artemis, Diana, Juno and Venus, and the action and reaction of one upon the other in myth and legend. Her star was the planet Venus, and classical writers give her the epithet Caelestis and Urania.”

The link to Urania is particularly interesting to me. Remember the nine Muses I mentioned in the Introduction? She was one of them and was associated with Astronomy. There is book known as the Urantia Book, that I consider to be perhaps one of the most dangerous books on the planet. It claims to be of “extra-terrestrial origin” and is sometimes simply called the “Blue Book.” It is over 2,000 pages thick and contains a lot of details concerning the layout, structure and function of the Orvonton universe (supposedly the Milky Way) and of earth in particular (known in this book as Urantia). Could this book have been “channeled” by an entity (Muse) known as Urania?

In the United States, this same goddess has been propped up as Columbia and is thus perched on top of our Capitol Building, which is referred to as the “Temple of Liberty” (another name for Columbia, Ishtar, Isis, Diana, etc.).

To many cultures, the entity described above was simply known as the “Queen of Heaven.” She is the one that the prophet Jeremiah wrote about, quoting YHVH, the one true God of Heaven who clearly was not happy that the Israelites (Judah) were worshipping her.
“Therefore do not pray for this people, nor lift up a cry or prayer for them, nor make intercession to Me; for I will not hear you. Do you not see what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? The children gather wood, the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods, that they may provoke Me to anger. Do they provoke Me to anger?” says the Lord. “Do they not provoke themselves, to the shame of their own faces?”

Therefore thus says the Lord God: “Behold, My anger and My fury will be poured out on this place—on man and on beast, on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground. And it will burn and not be quenched.” (Jeremiah 7:16-20)
There certainly is no real “Queen of Heaven” sitting beside our King YHVH. And since we find absolutely no evidence in Scripture for the notion of female angels, we must therefore conclude that these so-called “goddesses” were in fact giants, Nephilim, and/or Elioud.
If we are to accept the ancient myths of other cultures as having originated from some measure of truth, then we are forced to acknowledge the fact that these gods and goddesses mated with one another as much as they did with normal humans. In the Greek myths for example, we know that the Titans were paired off as follows:

Cronus and Rea
Coeus and Phoebe
Hyperion and Theia
Oceanus and Tethys

In the Greek myths, some of the children of the first generation Titans are also referred to as Titans and they were both male and female:

Asteria
Astraea (Dike)
Astraeus
Atlas
Eos (Dawn)
Eosphorus (or Hesperus)
Epimetheus
Helius
Leto (mother of Apollo and Artemis/Diana)
Menoetius
Pallas
Perses
Prometheus
Selene
The Titans Cronus and Rea were said to have been the parents of the Olympian gods Hera, Demeter, Hestia, Poseidon, Hades and Zeus. The female Titan Leto was the daughter of Coesus and Phoebe and she was herself the mother of Apollo and Artemis/Diana (the so-called “Queen of Heaven”) through her union with Zeus.
Some would argue that Zeus was in fact an angel because he was known as a “sky-god” who would come down and mate with women. But where do we see precedence anywhere in Scripture for angels being born, growing up and dying? No. Zeus was no angel We get all of our stories about Zeus from the Greek mythology/history, and in those writings we find that this so-called “king of the gods” was born and then later hidden away on the island of Crete by his mother Rhea who didn’t want her son to be eaten by his father Cronus. From there, young Zeus grew up and as

Genesis 6:4 states, became a “great man of renown,” but then he died and was buried at Knossos, Crete.
“From the terrace of my rooms in the inn at Knossos I can see Mount Dicta where Jupiter [Zeus] was born, Mount Ida where he was brought up, and Mount Joukta where tradition locates his tomb. There is a depth of philosophical thought in this landscape which overcomes me, and every evening I return to gaze again on the violet coloured heights of Mount Joukta. The great dome of the mountain above the ruins of Knossos is truly worthy to be the tomb of a god.”
— Angelo Mosso
Dr. Ken Johnson agrees:
Jupiter’s [Zeus’] tomb is in Crete, on the north side of the city of Knossos. Knossos was supposed to have been founded by Vesta [Rhea], his mother. The inscription over the tomb of Jupiter says in Greek, “Zan Kronou,” which means “Zeus, son of Kronos.”
— Ken Johnson, Th.D.
If we are prepared to accept that Zeus was indeed a real individual that lived sometime in the ancient past, and we can acknowledge that he is nowhere described as an angel, nor does he even fit any description of one, then we must conclude that he was some sort of powerful man; most likely a later generation Nephilim. If we can accept that as truth, then his sister goddesses would also therefore have to fit that same description. If we can safely come to that conclusion, then it is very easy to see why God would want to wipe out all the men, women and children in known Nephilim villages within the land of Canaan.

The next author defends scripture with the following exegetical work where Gilgamesh is Nimrod. We have to remember deity worship extended from explanation of the natural. Man and god were comingled, one representing the other in one story and vice versa. Historians, writters of antiquity certainly worked within their best capacities to portray in their works that which they sought proper, whether to deceive or to enlighten is another matter.

I did such a nice intro piece on this earlier but by bad fortune and poor habit I lost it. Went skiing with my kid, renewed, lets give it another go. I have a way of simplifying things so that I could understand them, because in so as much as I have web and research skill, they are certainly not the talents that define me. This next piece highlights after the water receded from the the great flood, the animals multiplied much faster than the humans and soon the humans had to build fortifications and hunt to lower the animal population, no different then we do today. Well, sure enough this giant descendant of Cain bloodline, likely what we would call today a black man due to the fact that the he was son of Cush. And Cush, Cushites means dark skinned folks, blacks. But wait, there’s more! It’s like a as seen on TV extravaganza, Nimrod, son of Cush, son of Ham and grand child of witch Naamah; gate keeper not only of knowledge of antideluvians, but genetic descendant of Cain, son of Adam, first to murder and spill his own brothers blood. God brought on the flood to wipe this very genetic code. As per usual, it did not work out. Naamah slept with Ham on the Ark against Gods wishes and had him smitten black for it as punishement for this trespass. This brought on Cush, who was the progenitor of the black race. Father of Nimrod, who would go on to submit men to worship false idols and not the true god YHWH, Jehovah, God of Abraham, Jacob and Isaac. The same God that commanded no idol worship but sent down Jesus as his own son, and told us we can only come to God through this proxy. Which in motion and prayer is no different the praying to Mary, also a false idol, or any othe patriarch or deity. Talk about confusion!

Descendants of Cush;

The narrative of the curse of Cain is found in the text of Genesis 4:11–16. The curse was the result of Cain murdering his brother, Abel, and lying about the murder to God.[2] When Cain spilled his brother’s blood, the earth became cursed as soon as the blood hit the ground. In a sense, the earth was left “drinking Abel’s blood”.[3] Genesis 4:12 gives a two-part sentencing for Cain’s curse. The first concerns the earth that was cursed by Abel’s blood.[4] Should Cain attempt to farm the land, the earth would not yield produce for him. This may imply why he went on to build cities,[5] namely the City of Enoch. The second part of the curse marks Cain as a fugitive (Hebrew: נע‎ ) and a wanderer (Hebrew: נד‎ ). The combination making up this Hebrew phrase נע ונד‎, “fugitive and wanderer”, is unique in the Hebrew Bible. Modern interpretations of the Hebrew verse 12 suggest that Cain went on to live a nomadic lifestyle and that he was also excluded from the family unit.[6] In the Septuagint, the emphasis on Cain’s curse is dramatically increased by the combination of the Greek participles στένων καὶ τρέμων (“groaning and shaking upon the earth”).[7] Syriac Christianity[8] interprets the Greek version to mean that Cain experienced a real physical affliction[9] that would enable others to know who he was when they saw him. Philo interprets the Greek verse 12 as an allegory for Cain’s fear of being soulless. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Targums translate the same verse to mean that Cain feared being “an exile and an unstable man”.[10]

Basically, Cain cursed, his bloodline cursed. Nimrod, cursed. Canaan, our protagonist in my “Occult” saga , cursed as cursed can be. Everyone is cursed. It’s a string of fallacies that leads to false results. As you can tell, we have much work ahead of us to break free from false logic and align with truth. Enjoy the next work off the archive!

Not all early 20th century literature identified Nimrod as the source for the Sumerian/Babylonian origin epic. Affirming Nimrod meant agreeing with official biblical canon. Institutions of education had long been penetrated by The Occult, and this could be an indicator of foul play. In the following example ther is no mention of Nimrod, almost specifically because it would not confer with many other works that were coming out at the same time on the subject. Marduk is the personification of our hero in this epic, you could almost smell the patina off the page. The cover of this book has an occult symbol so right away I was not surprised that the link was not drawn in the work. The work of Masons is becoming more and more obvious to me as I become more familiar with their work. The freemasonry books in the reference section of this website, and all the works of its masters are subject to interpretation and never to be accepted for face value.

Mesopotamia; the Babylonian and Assyrian civilization
by Delaporte, Louis, 1874-1944

Publication date 1925
Topics Civilization, Assyro-Babylonian
Publisher London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.; New York, A.A. Knopf

Link to Archive

That is the importance of scripture, it gives a baseline to bounce new stories as they come up. We have the sourcecode, we just need to eliminate the work of men from the work of God, our creator that which shows his works through nature. That is why we research and compare data. It gives us a better perspective of how time unfolded, and where we fit in. Knowing to avoid the dualistic dark side of the natural world will help free your indentured servitude that was placed on you at birth. 

Hebrew and Babylonian traditions; the Haskell lectures, delivered at Oberlin College in 1913 and since rev. and enl., by Morris Jastrow ..
by Jastrow, Morris, 1861-1921
Lint to Archive

Publication date 1914
Topics Civilization, Assyro-Babylonian, Judaism — Religion
Publisher New York, C. Scribner’s Sons
Collection Princeton; americana
Digitizing sponsor MSN
Contributor Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Language English

p.307-308

It is sufficient in a general survey of Hebrew and Babylonian ethics to indicate the divergent lines of development taken by the course of ethics in the two civilisations and which may be briefly summed up in the statement that Babylonian and Assyrian ethics, despite its many notable aspects, failed to find the corrective to the materialistic conception of life which is an unavoidable outcome of what we ordinarily regard as the progress of civilisation. Such progress manifests itself in an advance in the arts, in the growth of commerce, in a more complicated political organisation, and in the elaboration of the religious life, and it is accompanied by increasing wealth and by more luxurious modes of life. The danger inherent, therefore, in any high form of culture is an undue emphasis on material advantages which, if unchecked, leads to effeminacy and ultimate degeneration. Babylonian and Assyrian ethics failed to check this tendency. The advice given to the favourite hero, Gilgamesh, “to eat, drink, and be merry” 1 strikes a characteristic note, and there are no indications of a counter movement such as we meet with in Hebrew literature, which by means of interpolations and counter comments actually succeeded in converting the parallel teachings of Ecclesiastes into an argument for the vanity of the materialistic conception of life. 1 Prophetical Judaism discovered the formula that acted as the antitoxin to both the materialistic and sceptical infection of advancing civilisation. That formula involved the setting up of holiness and purity as the aim of life in keeping with the ethical conception of a Deity of universal scope, Himself enthroned in holiness and purity, but whose mysterious workings were beyond the reach of the finite human understanding. The solution, to be sure, involved difficulties which are keenly felt still in our own days  but the removal of all materialistic aspects from the conception of divine government of the universe, and the persistent maintenance of high ethical aims led to the strengthening of the element of faith. Faith in the unseen, faith in the unknowable, faith in the midst of the mysteries of life.

We know today a different saga. Babylon did not fall. The Canaanites and their deity worship penetrated the Hebrews, Babylon, Persia and Rome. They played each side against each other whilst persevering via clandestine operations, until the clandestine became the new normal.

Today, the diety worship and spell casting are at a all time high. The whole world is mesmerized by material wants sold to us via The Occults sorcerers (singers, artists, actors, politicians). We have yet again been forced into a show down of dark vs. light. Should we fail to yield to our history and experience we will surely crumble. All these agendas upon us are not ours, they are of these devils the Canaanites and their “Babylonian Mystery Religion”. It’s no mystery anymore. We have prima facia; they are in our sights.

Eugenics
-Vaccines
-Infanticide
-Gender Confusion

Transhumanism
-GMO
-Monarch Programming

Religion
-Deity Worship (false idol)

Political Idiology
-All illegal forms of government

Education, Science & Medicine
-Total Inversion of Nature and Common Sense

THE ORIGIN AND REAL NAME OF NIMROD
Link To Archive
By E. G. H. Kraeling Union Theological Seminary, New York 1922

The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures

The figure of the biblical Nimrod has ever attracted the attention of Assyriologists and numerous have been the attempts to explain the origin and name of this builder of Babel. A number of years ago the writer became convinced that the name could not be sepa- rated from the city of Marad and that it was an epithet of LUGAL- MARAD-DA, a god worshiped at that place. The city of Marad was a center of great importance in early times; thus in the days of the kings of Ur the patesi of Marad follows in rank the patesis of Lagash, Um-ma, and Babylon. 1 Its zikkurrat or tower is mentioned II J?, 50, col. 7, 17 (E-GAR-GA-UL-UL). The son of the great Naram-Sin was ishakku or governor of Marad — a fact implying that it was a very prominent post — and founded there the temple of the god LUGAL-MARAD-DA. Several thousand years later Nebu- chadrezzar piously restored this edifice, and both the foundation and the restoration inscriptions of this “Nimrod” temple, as I would like to call it, have recently come to light. 2
LUGAL-MARAD-DA simply means “king (lugal) of Marad.” The title “king,” however, can be circumscribed by EN =” lord” (or NIN which in the older period also can mean “lord” and is basically the same word). The king of Marad could therefore be called EN-MARAD or NIN-MARAD, “lord of Marad.” Professor Prince cited my view that EN-MARAD is the biblical Nimrod in JAOS, XL (1920), 201 f. A recent discovery enables us to furnish definite proof that this is the case. It had long been known that a god LUGAL-BAN-DA was prominently worshiped at Marad. He was the patron deity of Gilgamesh to whom appeal is made by the hero in the epic- Poebel’s dynastic tablet from Nippur taught us that LUGAL-BAN-DA was really an old, semimythical king, the third ruler of the first kingdom of Erech. And now the newly

1 Cf. Hommel, Geographic und Geschichte des Alten Orients, I (1907), 307.
2 Clay, Miscellaneous Inscriptions (1915), Nos. 10 and 34.

published “God list for school use” proves that BAN, the second element in this name, must be read phonetically as -marad-, so that LUGAL-BAN-DA = Lugal-marad-da. 1 To cap the climax, we find in II R, 57 : 2Zcd the god EN-BAN-DA, who must now be read En-marad-da, and this supplies us with the exact by-form of Lugal- marad-da that we had postulated. The alternate form Nin^marad may have also been current, but it does not happen to occur in the inscriptions. 2 Philologically this explanation of the name certainly seems acceptable.
But can we show that historically or mythologically any affinity exists between Nimrod and the “lord of Marad” ?
In the dynasty tablet from Nippur, already cited, the following names open the list of the kings of E-an-na (i.e., Erech) : 3
TfiABS
1. Mes-ki-in-ga-se-ir, son of Samas, high priest and king 325
2. En-me-ir-kdr, son of the former 420
3. Lugal-marad-da, the shepherd 1200
4. Dumu-zi* the hunter from the city of KHA-A 100
5. GIS-BIL-GA-MES? son of the goddess Nin-sun and the high
priest of the city of Kullab 126
The mythically long reigns of these rulers at once remind one of the biblical antediluvians; and above all, Lugal-marad-da is given the supreme reputation for longevity — which in terms of our language means that he is the greatest of them all. Now Albright has shown that En-me-ir-kdr, predecessor of Lugal-marad-da, is identical with Euechoros* the grandfather of Gilgamos in the legend recorded by Aelian, and that this legend originally referred to the birth of Lugal- marad-da. He was born in secret by the daughter of En-me-ir-kdr,

i Schroeder, MVAG, XXI, 180 f.
2 Albright, JAOS, XL, 335, postscript, says, “Kraeling’s suggestion En-marad- quoted by Prince, is nearly correct.” He himself prefers Nin-marad (p. 314) — a form which naturally also occurred to me — and arrived at his conclusion without knowing of my views. On account of the occurrence of En-marad-da, however, I choose to abide by my original suggestion. The transition of a to 3 in Nimrod is well explained by Albright’s comparison of Babylonian Dagan with West Semitic Dagon.
“Of. Poebel, Historical Texts (1914), pp. 88 f.; cf. p. 74.
« As Tammuz- Adonis this ancient king of Erech received the worship of the Orientals for thousands of years. He is called “the hunter,” but is more a tragic than a heroic figure in legend; cf. the material in Jeremias, Altorientalische Geisteshultur (1913), pp. 263 A.
» Otherwise written Gilgamesh, the famous hero of the epic.
« The name has been handed down as Seuechoros, but the initial S is merely dittog- raphy of the last letter of the preceding word; cf. Albright, op. cit., p. 311.

doubtless was in some way raised by a shepherd, and later came to the throne. 1 This accounts for the fact that he is called “the shep- herd.” His pastoral character must not mislead us to picture him as a flute-playing Anacreonite; the example of David shows that the wild, free life of the ancient shepherd was the best school for a warrior. The allusion “Shepherd” merely is to remind of the legend; just so Sargon might be called the “gardener,” in remem- brance of the legend about his youth.
Lugal-marad-da — “lord of Marad” is of course not a genuine personal name, but a title, and the fact that this title has caused the real name of its bearer to pass into oblivion shows that it was famous and much used. Like the “old man of the mountains,” the lord of Marad was known far and wide. Originally a real-hero of flesh and blood, he became a god as early as the days of Naram-Sin, the memory of his greatness being idolized by his people at Marad later in less glorious times. The r61e that he played as god clearly indi- cates that he was first of all a warrior, for he is regarded as a mani- festation of the Babylonian war-god Urta (NIN-IB). 2 The passage already cited, II R, 57 : 23cd, explains En-marad-da as Urta sabit purussu ill (“who proclaims the decisions of the gods”), and else- where we have the group d lugal-marad-da d Mash, thus identifying Mash ( = Urta) with the lord of Marad. This fits very well the biblical statement about Nimrod that he began to be a hero (gibbof) upon earth (Gen. 10:8).
The militant hero of ancient times was usually a hunter; the chase of the lion or of the wild ox or of the boar was the next best excitement to war, and we therefore find the Assyrian kings deeply interested in the chase. Hundreds of representations on Babylonian seals show a heroic figure grappling with or slaughtering a lion. It has been customary to regard this figure as Gilgamesh; some scholars have observed, however, that the so-called Gilgamesh scenes on the seals do not illustrate the epic at all in the form in which it has been handed down to us. 3 The lion-killing is certainly very incidental and even problematic in the epic (col. ii, 1). I would like to suggest

1 The legend that has been immortalized by Sophocles in his Oedipus tragedy shows similar motifs and may have been influenced by oriental stories.
2 So expressly in Schroeder’s god list, op. cit., text, 11. 2, 15, 17.
3 Of. O. Weber, Altorientalische Siegelbilder (1920), I, 14 fl.

that these scenes really refer to our king of Marad. Since Gilgamesh worships him as patron deity, he must have been a greater hero than Gilgamesh. Only through such seal representations can the fame of Nimrod as a great hunter have become current among the Hebrews.
From this point of view we may be able to determine the original meaning of the proverb which already at an early date caused the interpolation 6f verse 9 into the text of Genesis, chapter 10. An inveterate and successful hunter in Israel is said to be “like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the face of Yahweh.” Remembering the fact that the Assyrian Heracles was often portrayed as a giant, 1 we may conclude that this expression originally is meant very literally as “measuring Up to divine size,” therefore superhuman, extraordinary. (It must be recalled that the monuments always portray the gods as much bigger than their human adorants.) Wherever the words “before the face of Yahweh” occur in a like connection the meaning “extraordinary” fits excellently (Jonah 3:3, an extraordinarily large city; Gen. 6:11, extraordinarily wicked). The Old Testament remembers that Nimrod was not one of the primeval gods, but rather a mortal who reached the divine estate; this presupposes that the legends about the king of Marad were well known.
It has seemed peculiar to many that J makes Nimrod a Cushite. But let us not forget that J’s home was in Judea and that the southern Judeans had much contact with South Arabia. The caravan road from South Arabia to the Mediterranean Sea led to Gaza, and the treasures of the East were shipped from thence to other lands. It is not accidental that J knows about the gold of the land of Havila as well as its bdellium and onyx stones. The name Cush in the Old Testament often includes Arabia as well as Ethiopia and the region of Chaldea can without difficulty be described as belonging to Cush. The cultural rather than the physiographical standpoint was the leading one for J; and it is quite clear that Chaldea, not only in late days, but also in the earliest times, was in close touch with central and southern Arabia. New groups of Arabian tribes were constantly filtering into that region — the region of the city of Marad — and maintaining intercourse with their relatives farther west.

1 Cf. the illustration in Jeremias, Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alien Orients (1916), p. 159.

What is more natural than that the news of the mighty king of Marad, the patron for every bandit and herdsman, should have passed into Arabia and through Arabia to southern Palestine? Proudly the Arab would boast of him as ” one of our own — a Cushite.” And so the Hebrew huntsman on the Edomite frontier, the man of the Esau type who was only found in the south, since in the north lived the more effeminate husbandman of Jacob’s kind, heard and passed on the story of that hunter of hunters of long ago. 1 If the news had come by way of northern Syria, Nimrod would never have been made a “Cushite.” As it is, the connection with Arabia is plain. 2
It seems surprising at the first glance that the Old Testament claims to have knowledge of Nimrod’s kingdom, for two millennia lie between the days of the king of Marad and the biblical narrator. Under those circumstances it would be idle to expect historical accuracy and to require of us to show that En-marad-da had done all the things attributed to Nimrod. We must rather expect to find that the mythical Nimrod has attracted to himself much that is not of his own accomplishment.
We can safely assert that “Nimrod the city-builder” has stolen Hammurabi’s laurels. If we are told that the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, Akkad, and Calneh 3 in the land of Shinar, we plainly have the rise of Babylon under Hammurabi pre- supposed, for only through this king’s activity did the city of Marduk come into the foreground. Very naturally he must have subjected Erech, Akkad, and Nippur in the course of his empire-building, but the fact that neither Larsa nor Nisin are mentioned shows that there is no conscious attempt to describe Hammurabi’s history. J merely mentions a few of the famous Babylonian cities that happen to occur to him.

i The stories of the lion-killing of Samson (Judges 14:6) and David (I Sam. 17:35) may have been influenced or inspired by the representations on the Babylonian seals that were passed about in Palestine.
2 The suggestion that Cush is really the Babylonian city of Kish (Van Gelderen, The Expositor [1914], pp. 276 1 . ; recently also Burkitt, Jour. Theol. Stud. , 1920) is neither necessary nor convincing.
s No explanation of Calneh has yet been offered that is preferable to Hilprecht’s and Hommel’s Nippur (Ki-illina, spoken for Ki-enlil, “the city of the god Enlil”); cf. Landersdorfer, Sumerisches im Alten Testament (1916), p. 28. The emendation to Kullaba (Jensen) is unlikely because this was merely a suburb of Erech.

When we are told that Nimrod went forth from Shinar to Ashur (Gen. 10: 11), we dare not expect to have before us any direct knowl- edge of an ancient conquest of Assyria by Hammurabi or Lugal- marad-da. The figure of Nimrod has here assumed an idealistic nature; it symbolizes the imperialism of the eastern Semites. The going forth from Babel to Ashur signifies merely that the star of empire passed westward. Therefore Ashur can be called “the land of Nimrod” (Mic. 5:4 f.) in later times, while a thousand years earlier this epithet only fitted Babel.
Some of the geographical detail of Gen. 10:11 f. is very puzzling. Shall we assume that a traveler who had visited Nineveh brought back and handed down an exact account of small towns in its imme- diate vicinity ? Only such a supposition would permit us to adopt the view that Rehoboth Ir is a r&bit-Nina 1 and Resen a rish-Sni. 2 But if the westward trend of the star of empire is described in Nim- rod’s going out to Ashur, we would rather expect the names of great and famous cities, similar to those mentioned in Babylonia. It is unlikely that the writer should have known, or that the reader should have cared about, such minor sites as the above-mentioned identifi- cations.
The name Rehoboth 3 might be an appellation given to any great city that had a number of “public squares” and was an important center of commercial activity. The use of a secondary name or of an appellative often becomes predominant; thus Jerusalem became known as Kadosh — “the holy one” (today still El-]£uds). Rehoboth possibly applied to Arbela, which ranks with Nineveh and Calah as one of the greatest of Assyrian cities; but Rasappa (the biblical Rezeph) should also receive mention because its name, meaning “paved street,” suggests affinity with “public squares,” 4 and because it was an important outpost on the Aramean frontier. If Resen refers to a large city, then the localization “between Nineveh and Calah” must be a gloss, like the other statement following it, “that

1 Cf. Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 216.
2 Johns, Enc. Bib., col. 4038; cf. Nestle ZDMO, 1904, pp. 158 f.
3 Konig, Die Genesis (1919), p. 402, rightly says that Ir is not a part of the name, but merely emphasizes the use of the common word Rehoboth as a proper name.
1 Cf. my Aram and Israel (1918), p. 63, and Herzfeld and Sarre, Am Euphrat und Tigris, I (1911), p. 136. It is not quite clear, however, whether Rasappa was an Assyrian possession as early as the time of the Jahwist.

is the great city.” Perhaps the time-honored caravanserai Resaina (Rds-el- c ain) is the original Resen. But these suggestions must be taken as very hypothetical, since it is impossible to demonstrate them. The point to be emphasized is that it is the mention of really important cities that should be expected.
A city king of ancient Marad, whose true name remains forgotten, then a god of war and of the chase, and finally the symbol of the imperialism of the eastern Semites, such has been the career of En-mar ad = Nimrod. At Wannet-es-Sa c dun, a mound on the Eu- phrates, west of Nippur, marking the site of Marad, his career was begun. There Naram-Sin’s son built E-igi-kalama, “the house of the eye of the lands,” as the place where Nimrod was to be worshiped, because the divine hero had been his father’s helper in battle. Thus reads the inscription on the door socket of the original Nimrod temple (Clay, Misc. Inscr., No. 10) :

Naram-Sin, the mighty king of the four quarters, the conqueror of nine armies in one year, when those armies he overcame and their three kings he bound and before Enlil brought, in that day Libel-ili, his son, the ruler of Marad, the temple of Lugal-marad-da in Marad built. Whosoever alters this inscription may Shamash and Lugal-marad-da tear out his foundation and exterminate his seed.

Burden of proof? Premise, created. Evidence, sought. Work, shown. Prima Facie, indicated. Proof, validated. Rebuttal, awaiting….