Do jews actually believe the book of Enoch tells them to genocide whites?

The flood account is almost universal. The same narrative exists in the written records of many ancient civilizations bearing its presence not only in the biblical Genesis but also in the ancient Mesopotamian epics, the Greek mythological writings and the Hindu literature. However, the oldest version of this story is found among the Sumerian texts that date back to the third millennium BCE. The Sumerian King List, a chronology of the antediluvian royal dynasties, places the date of the flood at a time around 10,000 BCE. This fact is quite significant since such date corresponds to the end of the last glacial period.

The Judeochristian version of the story seeks to make us believe that Yahweh sent the flood because antediluvian Humanity had become corrupt due to her interbreeding with the "fallen angels". In the Book of Genesis it is claimed that the heart of all men (except for Noah and his family) was solely inclined towards evil (Genesis 6:5). The biblical narrators want to convince us that the planetary genocide carried out by their strange god was not only necessary but also just.

Attached: Boreas-and-Orietyia-by-Evelyn-de-Morgan.jpg (1917x3000, 1.44M)

However, the original Mesopotamian versions tell a much different story to the later Hebrew plagiarism. In the Akkadian Poem of Atrahasis, we see that the noise of humans began to annoy some of the gods, particularly Enlil, the half-brother of Enki, and therefore the Heavenly Council of Anu made the decision to wipe out the human world. Here the expression noise, whose equivalent in the original Akkadian text is rigmu, can include the semantic nuances of rebellion and uprising (Kvanvig, 2011ii). Man had become more intelligent and thus uncontrollable thanks to the divine blood that was added to the human genus through her miscegenation with the Igigi or 'sons of the gods'. Therefore, Man could no longer be a mere worker of the Gods and in that sense his rebelliousness was just and natural.

Besides, contrary to the accusations of the Bible which blames all Mankind, in the more ancient Mesopotamian version we encounter an episode in which Enki, after saving the Human Race against the will of the Heavenly Council, defends his human children and explains that the gods should not punish the whole of Humanity for the crimes of a small few (Atrahasis 6:16-19). Here the benevolent Enki makes it clear that the criminals worthy of punishment were only a small minority group. The biblical allegation that "every imagination of the thoughts of Man's heart was only evil continually " was nothing but a deceptive pretext in order to justify the unlawful extermination of a whole race!

Attached: Prometheus Athena Creation of Man.jpg (1024x783, 431K)

Now we shall see how the flood occurred and how the Human Race survived.

Those days human civilization flourished and Mankind, already strengthened by her intermixing with the divine blood of the Igigi, multiplied enormously. Her noise began to annoy Enlil who still dwelt in his terrestrial sanctuary. Enlil complained about the noise of Man and called for a meeting among the higher gods. Back then Enlil still disliked Mankind and conserved the same misanthropy which he had inherited from his father Anu (Yahweh). Many people erroneously believe that Enlil was responsible for the deluge against Humanity. However, in the Sumerian Eridú Genesis, the earliest version of the flood story, we see that it was Anu who announced the order to destroy the human world (Eridú Genesis 98-100). Likewise, in the Babylonian version presented in the Epic of Gilgamesh, Anu is the first to give his oath to exterminate Mankind and then he is followed by the other higher gods. In the end, the true author of the genocide is none other than Anu, the same Anu who was opposed to the enlightenment of Man and then cursed him in the Garden of Eden.

In the Council, Enki found himself forced to give his oath to destroy the Human Race, but then he deceived his divine peers and forewarned his loyal devotee Ziusudra, the Enkist king of the region of Shuruppak, appearing to him in a vision and informing him of what Anu and his henchmen were scheming. Enki taught him how to build a vehicle for the salvation of his lineage. Let's bear in mind that the story of Ziusudra is a lot more ancient than the biblical plagiarism of Noah's Ark by millennia.

Attached: Creation_of_man_Prometheus_Berthelemy_Louvre_INV20043.jpg (3725x2328, 3.38M)

When the deluge came and the waters rose, Enki rescued Ziusudra and many Humans of his lineage from the deadly waves. The flood was brought about by the Anuists who utilized their alien climatological technology in order to change the planet's temperature and melt the icecaps that covered the north of our world. On the other hand, Enki used his advanced crafts in order to evacuate his human children and save his genetic seed.

It is important to note that the savior of Man is always Enki, the rebellious god, in all of the pre-biblical flood accounts. In the Mesopotamian versions, it is Enki-Ea, the Ushumgal of the Sanctuary of Eridú (the Serpent of Eden), who rebels against the Council of Anu and saves Ziusudra. Likewise, in the Greek version, it is Prometheus, the same benevolent god who opposed the Titans and handed over to Man the Fire of the Gods, who disrupts the plan of the malevolent deities and saves Deucalion. And astoundingly, according to the Hindu account, it is Matsia, the first avatar of the divinity, who saves Manu, the wise man, from the destruction of the waters. In Sanskrit Matsia means 'fish' and his namesake's avatar was a fish-like deity. Let's remember that in Sumerian culture Enki, the lord of the waters, was associated with the fish! All the pre-biblical accounts point out that Enki was our savior in unanimous fashion. Only the Bible ascribes the salvational act to Yahweh.

Attached: Prometheus and Athena.jpg (1280x1015, 759K)

What is your reasoning behind that claim, and what are your specific sources?

I have studied the summerian texts, and i can tell you that nothing of what Sitchin says can be found within that corpos of mythology. The summerian texts themselves are also not very reliable when it comes to the accurate transmission of details; stories written within the same time period show large discrepancies from city to city.

It's easy to tear everything out of their historical and cultural contexts and then weave them all back together to form a new narrative - one that fits to your liking... but it has nothing to do with truth, reason or good scholarship.

I would like you to back up your statements, using the electronic corpus of sumerian literature, made by the University of Oxford. I invite all those participating to search for keywords mentioned by professional bullshitters such as Sitchin and Von Daniken. See if it holds up.

etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/

Attached: 4565869780.jpg (306x306, 15K)

Ethiopian Christians consider it canon.

He's a fucking Luciferian, Enki is Lucifer

Technically, the real Book of Enoch would be. But the one we have is a fabrication. The original is forever lost.

Why Did The Vatican Remove 14 Books From The Bible in 1684?

The Vatican church, or the Roman Catholic church, has a long history of corruption and deception. Aside from literally committing acts of outright genocide several centuries ago against the Cathars, to sexually abusing children in more modern times, it is certainly one of the most corrupt organizations in history.

In the year 1611 the Bible was translated from Latin into English. Back then the Bible contained a total of 80 books and the last 14 books, which today have been excluded, made up the end of the Old Testament and were as follows:

1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Tobit
Judith
The rest of Esther
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch with the epistle Jeremiah
The Songs of the 3 Holy children
The history of Susana
bel and the dragon
The prayer for Manasses
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
In 1684 all of these books were removed from all versions except for a 1611 edition, which was the very first edition translated into English.

Pope Innocent XI

Attached: Pope Innocent XI.jpg (1024x768, 206K)

this

have you read them?

>imply Enoch wasn't white