Keavy Church of Christ

(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)

It is written:

Psalm 97:7 (The Passion Translation)-Shame covers all who boast in other gods, for they worship idols. For all the supernatural powers once worshiped the true and living God.

One of the subjects that I am often asked about deals with the Anunnaki. People especially from a pagan background are intrigued by these beings, and so also are those who have spent much time watching the television show “Ancient Aliens.”

Let’s study.

First, who or what are the Anunnaki?

The word “Anunnaki” has reference to a race of gods who are referenced primarily in ancient Sumerian writings. The Sumerians were a race of people who inhabited the area of modern day Iraq (ancient Babylon) long before the time of Christ. The famous texts known as the Ugaritic texts form a great deal of our knowledge of the Sumerians, and of the Anunnaki.

Heiser documents:

“For our purposes, though, it is the less grandiose ancient civilization of Ugarit, a city-state in ancient Syria, just to the north of Israel, which is particularly relevant. 1 The site of Ugarit was discovered in 1928 and excavated in the decades that followed. One of the major finds was a library containing thousands of clay tablets, roughly 1400 of which were in an alphabetic language (now called Ugaritic) that was closer to biblical Hebrew than any other ancient language. The vocabulary and grammar are in many instances virtually identical. Scholars have learned a lot from this library, about both Ugarit and the content of the Old Testament. The chief deity of Ugarit was El—one of the names that appear in the Old Testament for the God of Israel. El had a divine council whose members were “the sons of El,” and he had a coruler, Baal. Since El’s and Baal’s duties sometimes appeared to overlap, and since Ugarit was so geographically close to Israel, it was small wonder that Baal worship was such a problem in Israel. The discoveries at Ugarit put all of that Old Testament history in context. El and Baal were, to say the least, markedly different in behavior from Yahweh of Israel. But the literature of Ugarit proved very illuminating in other respects, especially as to where El, Baal, and the Ugaritic divine council lived and held court. At Ugarit the divine council had three levels: the highest authority (El, who did most of his ruling through a coruling vizier, Baal), the “sons of El,” and messenger gods (mal’akim).” (Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering The Supernatural Worldview Of The Bible, 45-46 (Kindle Edition): Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press)

It is from these texts that we gain an intriguing window into the Sumerian gods and goddesses known as the Anunnaki. According to one of these texts:

“The seven great Anunna-gods were burdening the Igigi-gods with forced labor… Ea made ready to speak, and said to the gods, his brothers: “What calumny do we lay to their charge? Their forced labor was heavy, their misery too much! Every day… the outcry was loud, we could hear the clamor. There is… Belet-ili, the midwife, is present. Let her create, then, a human, a man, Let him bear the yoke! Let him bear the yoke! Let man assume the drudgery of the god.” Belet-ili, the midwife, is present. Let the midwife create a human being! Let man assume the drudgery of the god.[The Epic of Atrahasis can be read in full at http://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/104-106-the-epic-of-atrahasis/)

Second, it is important to realize that in the Sumerian texts, the Anunnaki were not considered Divine, i.e., they were created beings who were lesser then their creator but were greater in power than humankind. Other texts in The Epic Of Atrahasis make this clear as well. For example:

“10. All lands were sea. 11. At that time there was a movement in the sea; 12 . Then was Eridu made, and E-sagil was built, 13. E-sagil, where in the midst of the Deep the god Lugal-dul-azaga 1 dwelleth; 14. The city of Babylon was built, and E-sagil was finished. 15. The gods, the Anunnaki, he 2 created at one time; 16. The holy city, the dwelling, of their hearts’ desire, they proclaimed supreme.” (Leonard William King Editor, Z. El Bey Luzac’s Semitic text and translation series. vol. xii-xiii, The Seven Tablets of Creation: Enuma Elish with Illustrations, 2759-2768 (Kindle Edition): London, England: Luzac and Co.)

Heiser makes another important note related to this consideration:

“The pre-Old-Babylonian Sumerian literature only knows the term A-nun-na “( gods) of royal seed”. As far as I know, it first appears repeatedly in the great building hymn of Gudea and designates the gods of Lagash here with the exception of the main gods of the city. According to cylinder A XXVII 15, they play a part in the divine jurisdiction and are asked for their intercession at the beginning of cylinder B. According to other religious texts, 1 the gods of Eridu and of Nippur, too, are called Anunnaku; it is said that they bow to a “great” god and that they pray to him, so they are not equal to him. The disempowerment of the city states that began with the deposition of several Ensi’s through Shulgi also took much away from the relevance of the local theocratic states. The term Anunnaku now began to gradually expand to the entirety of the gods. In the Akkadianized form Anunnaku, the term was also adopted by the Hittites. H. Otten’s (yet to be finished) compilations, which he graciously granted me to look at, preliminarily list evidence from five texts, which I cannot get into here. According to H. Otten’s friendly disclosure, the Igigu do not appear in Hittite texts. The Igigu—(Nominative case; Gen.-Acc. Igigi)—first appear in Old Babylonian texts from the time of Hammurabi or shortly before. The word looks Semitic, but eludes any interpretation for now. The Sumerians translated it with the parallel term to Anunna—that seemed to just have been created at the time—Nungal-ene, “great rulers”, which shows us how one understood the meaning of the word Igigu. The formation nun-gal-e-ne in contrast to the doubling of the gal in dingir-gal-gal-e-ne, “great gods”, reinforces the impression that this is a post-Sumerian translation word. From unilingual Sumerian texts, the compilations of Anunnaku, Falkenstein record only one passage for that: at the end of a list of underworld and primeval deities in the myth fragment called “The Death of Gilgamesh” by the publisher S. N. Kramer, the dnun-gal-e-ne-du6-ku-ga-ke4-[ ne] appear after the da-nun-na-du6-kù-ga-ke4-[ ne] (BASOR 94/ 1944, 8 B 21 f. with hybrid doubled-ene). A definite meaning of the term cannot be inferred from this single passage and the age of the poem does not seem to be precisely determinable for now, either. In a wholly destroyed context, [d] nun-gal-e-ne also appears in one of the many fragments of a bilingual stele of Hammurabi (YOS IX 58, I); the Akkadian parallel texts for that are missing entirely, even in the duplicate from Ur (UET I no. 146). In syllabic notation, nu-un-ga-le-ne as an equivalent to i-na I-gi-gi can be found in a bilingual hymn to Irnina/ Ishtar that has been partly preserved through school tablets from Tell Harmal (Sumer 13, 69, 3 f. Parallel to that are the a-nu-na | | i-na E-nu-na-ki in line 1 f.); he calls Ishtar “outstanding among the Igigu.” 2 In the contemporaneous unilingual Akkadian texts, still more goddesses are repeatedly addressed as outstanding among the Igigu (cf. Ishtar ra-bi-it I-gi-gi RA 22, 172, 2.4; Irnina ga-she-er-ti I-gi-gi ZA 44, 32, 26; Aruru sag-kal-la-at I-gi4-gi4 in an unpublished hymn of the Hilprecht Collection col. III (?), line 23 alongside the title ku-ur-ku-rat dA-nun-na-ke4 i-li ù sar-ri in lines 24 and 26), while, according to the beginning of Hammurabi’s law stele, Annum, the king of the Anunnaku, makes Marduk great in I-gi4-gi4 (col. I 14). A Lamashtu incantation lists—after ten partly subordinate deities—the el-lu-tum I-gi-gu (F. M. Th. Böhl, MLVS II 3, 10). The Anunnaku, in the form Enunnaku, which appear in Old Babylonian texts and some more recent ones, can furthermore be found in a hymn to Papullegarra from Kesh, who is called ta!-a!-lim! E-nu!-na-ki i-li aḫ-ḫi-i-ka “equal brother of your divine brothers, the Anunnaku” (JRAS Cent. Spl. 67, 8): the penitential psalm to Ishtar UM I i, no. 2 writes in lines 23, 55, and 62 dA-nu-na, but shu-ur-ba-at E-nu-uk-ki in line 76. In the case of the Igigu, one does not have to think of a big number in any of the mentioned passages.” (Michael S. Heiser, The Anunnaki Gods According to Ancient Mesopotamian Sources: English Translations of Important Scholarly Works With Brief Commentary, 93-137 (Kindle Edition, emphasis added): Blind Spot Press)

So, it is clear that the Anunnaki were not considered to be eternal (i.e., Divine) but were instead created at some point.

Third, it is also clear from the above quotation that according to the beliefs of the Sumerians, humanity was created to be a slave race. This is far different from the Bible teaching, which shows that God made humankind as a direct extension of grace and love (cf. Psalm 136:1-9).

It is here that some people claim that the Anunnaki were actually extraterrestrials (aliens) from another world. Even if this is true (and it is not as we will shall notice), it would not change the fact that they are still created beings who are dependent upon and subject to the Eternal God (i.e., Yahweh). Whether there are aliens or not, you cannot get away from the need for the existence of the God Who has always has existed, is existing right now, and Who always will exist (i.e, the great I AM, cf. Exodus 3:14; John 8:58). If the being we call “God” was created by someone “before Him,” and so on and so forth, then this would lead to unlimited number of past beings which would then lead to an unlimited number of contradictions which would then make existence impossible. As Powell has well illustrated:

“Actual infinites are sets of numbers to which no increment can be added since, by nature of their infiniteness, the set includes all numbers—there is nothing to add. If this is hard to imagine, there is good reason: actual infinites do not exist and cannot exist in the physical world. If actual infinites did exist in the physical world, we would see absurdities and effects we could not live with, literally. For instance, let’s say you had a CD collection that was infinitely large, and each CD had an infinite number of songs on it. If you listened to one CD, you hear as much music as if you had listened to all of the CDs—an infinite amount—and yet those infinites are of different sizes—a nonsensical notion. Let’s also say that there were only two artists in your CD collection, Bach and the Beatles, and that every other CD was by the Beatles. This would mean that you had as many Beatles CDs as you would Beatles and Bach CDs combined; they would both be an infinite number. But at the same time they would be different sized infinites. And would the number of Beatles CDs be odd or even? It must be one or the other, but to speak of infinity in such a way is irrational.” “Or imagine a racecar driver and his son. The racecar driver is making circuit after circuit on a track a mile long. Meanwhile in the infield, his three-year-old son is on his tricycle going in circles. The son is completing a dozen or so circuits to his dad’s one. But if they had each been going for an infinite amount of time, they would have completed an equal number of circuits! If this makes your brain hurt or is confusing at all, then you are beginning to understand why actual infinites do not exist in the physical world. These examples are not just interesting brainteasers or puzzles. The fact that if X = Y then X cannot also be twelve times greater than Y is extremely important. You would never want to cross a bridge, ride in a car, or live in a house designed by an engineer who didn’t recognize or didn’t care about the absurdities of actual infinites. This demonstration of the non-existence of actual infinites can be applied in two real-world areas, time and causality. The best way to show that time is not infinite, that it had a beginning, is to observe that there is a “now.” If now exists, then time cannot be infinite. To show this, picture the moment “now” as a destination, like a train station. Then picture time as train tracks that are actually infinitely long. If you were a passenger waiting on the train to arrive, how long would you have to wait? The answer is: forever. You can never reach the end of infinity; thus, infinitely long train tracks cannot ever be crossed. There is no end to arrive at, no station. If infinitely long train tracks could be crossed, they would be the equivalent of a one-ended stick, a nonsensical notion. In fact, this is the opposite limitation of potential infinites. Just as potential infinites are finite numbers that can never turn infinite, actual infinites could never reach the end of their infiniteness and turn finite. But there is an end, a “now”; the train did arrive at the station. This means the tracks of time cannot be infinitely long. There cannot be an infinite number of preceding moments prior to the present moment. The past is not an actual infinite. Thus, time had to have a beginning. Time, however, did not cause itself to spring into existence. If it had a beginning, then something initiated it. This is where causality comes into the picture. There is no such thing as an effect that was not caused. You are an effect of the biological process caused by your parents. These words you now read were caused by my typing on a keyboard. The current state of the universe is an effect caused by various astronomical and physical conditions. Note, however, that each of the causes mentioned are also effects. For example, your parents are not only your cause, but they are the effects of their parents who were the effects of their parents, and so on. But, as the non-existence of actual infinites shows, the chain of causes cannot regress forever. The train station in this case is made of present causes; because we have causes now, there must be a beginning to the sequence. Thus, there must be a cause that is not an effect, an uncaused cause, or first cause. Since the universe is an effect, it must have had a cause itself. The Kalam argument tells us that the universe had a beginning and that the beginning was caused by an uncaused cause. At this point there are only two options: either the cause was personal or it was impersonal. Reflection on what this uncaused cause would look like leads us to a conclusion rather quickly. The first cause would require an ability to create. Without this ability nothing could be created. It would also require an intention to create, a will to initiate the universe. Without this will to create, nothing would be created. It would require a non-contingent being, one whose existence depends on nothing but itself. If it was contingent, then it would simply be one more effect in the chain of causes and effects. And it must be transcendent. The cause of the universe must be outside of and apart from the universe. Now add all these things together. What kind of thing relies on nothing for its existence, has the power to create something from nothing, has a will to do it or not do it and has the characteristic of existing outside of the creation? Does this sound like a personal or impersonal being? Personal, of course. Thus, the Kalam argument brings us to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning that was caused by a personal, powerful, transcendent being.” (Doug Powell, Holman QuickSource Guide to Christian Apologetics (Holman Quicksource Guides), 594-692 (Kindle Edition); Nashville, TN: Holman Reference)

Furthermore, there are other problems with the Anunnaki being alien “gods.”

“One of these aspects is the idea stating that extraterrestrials created humanity (what is sometimes known as “directed panspermia”). Again, this view still doesn’t remove the question of the ultimate Creator. Stating that extraterrestrials created humanity does not get someone away from God. The next obvious question would be: “Then where did they come from?” Some may even be tempted to state that God Himself is an extraterrestrial, but this is nonsense, because not only does this theory run into similar problems as the extraterrestrials-as-angels position, but it also doesn’t explain the origin of matter.…Basically, the gods were tasked with hard work, so they decided to create humans to do the work instead. According to these ancient texts, humans are nothing more than a slave race. One might wonder if, in this context, humanity was created in the image of the gods in the same way the Bible teaches we are created in the image of YHWH. Despite what some of the Ancient Astronaut literature claims, the image of God idea does not appear in Mesopotamian texts; it is purely a biblical and theistic concept. In fact, the word for “image” never appears in the Mesopotamian account of humanity’s creation.[ 256] Rather, in Mesopotamian understanding, we were created far below any “image” concept. We were created as slaves. Of course, this clashes drastically with what many alien abductees and experiencers have been told about humanity. Many of them, even on an individual basis, are told they are special and loved. Yet, at the same time, they are expected to believe the contrasting creation accounts of supposed Anunnaki alien beings. Therefore, how can the message of being special be trusted by the abductee/ experiencer? Shouldn’t aliens be aware of what their ancient ancestors said about them? The conflicting accounts simply do not add up. We can contrast this creation account to the biblical one. In a biblical worldview, every man, woman, child, and even unborn person has inherent worth as an image-bearer of God. The Bible teaches, as we saw earlier, that life is sacred. We are God’s representatives on Earth. Through biblical teaching, every person truly is special, unique, and loved in God’s eyes. If the alien creator worldview is correct, there is no higher purpose for the life of any human. Nobody is truly special. There is no concept of eternal reward in Heaven from a personal and loving God. In fact, if any concept humans have of God is actually a physical, alien life form who came to be through naturalistic, evolutionary means, this limits reality to the physical universe. There would be no notion of a spiritual reality outside of material reality from which physical reality comes. Essentially and logically, any sense of spirituality would have to be abandoned; otherwise, it would be illogical and inconsistent to say that aliens were not created by any sort of God, yet they are spiritual beings like us with a soul. Where did the alien soul come from? Are we to suppose it evolved as well? It is simply illogical, yet these contradictory ideas are what many abductees claim to have been told by their alien visitors. Those who fall into the category of those who believe the universe itself has life and treat it as a living being or “biocosm” have a logical inconsistency as well. No matter how spiritual they might think the universe is, without a Creator, it is still composed of matter and nothing beyond. Usually those who hold this view consider the universe as its own creator. Regarding it this way avoids the idea of a personal deity who transcends creation. This is an attractive idea to some, because it allows the individual to avoid religion, the Bible, and the personal accountability Christianity teaches while still maintaining a belief in something bigger than one’s own self. However, again, the logical conclusion of this view is that there is nothing outside of ordinary matter. No one is special nor unique. Nothing we do or believe really matters in the grand scheme of things, because there is no grand scheme of things. Of course, most who hold this view would not agree with that conclusion—but therein lies the inconsistency. How can a spiritual understanding exist without a spiritual reality? If aliens created human beings, there is no higher purpose for the life of any given human. This means that humans are simply a higher form of animal and would be considered lesser than the aliens who created humanity. The only expressed purpose of humanity is servitude/ slavery to the alien creators. Of course, some may make the point that there are multiple races of aliens, and some want to help us achieve our full potential. However, this creates problems as well. How are we to know the difference between the good aliens and bad aliens? It seems the “bad” aliens would not identify themselves as such, and all aliens would claim to be “good.” According to ancient Mesopotamian creation myths, the gods behave the same as humans, meaning they are capable of deception and of acting purely out of self-interest. How can we know if they can be trusted and who we can trust? If alien abduction scenarios are true, how are the violations humans have to endure considered benevolent? If a human being were kidnapping a person and subjecting him or her to undergo forced medical procedures, would we have the same outlook? Why should this be different just because it’s an alien, not a human, causing the abuse? Why have some of the world’s leading authorities on alien abductions, such as Dr. David Jacobs, concluded that the motivation of aliens is not in our best interest or for our benefit, but are for their own? Another point, which we will cover in more detail a bit later, is this: If the alien creator view is correct, the idea of racial superiority and inequality would be true and consistent. This conclusions comes from the Mesopotamian texts that tell us the gods created kingship for humankind. Mirrored in certain works of modern Ancient Astronaut literature, more Anunnaki blood went into certain humans than others. This means that certain bloodlines are inherently superior because they are royal. Those who hold this view would logically have to ask themselves if they are among the royal bloodline. Are they as racially gifted by the gods as other people? Are other non-Caucasian races in the royal bloodline? If the idea of racial superiority is true, should we defend it? Will the gods enforce this idea when they return? Will there be certain bloodlines who rule and other bloodlines who serve? Of course, most who believe this would reject any form of racism or racial superiority—but once again, this is a logical inconsistency. If aliens created humans, especially if the ancient Mesopotamian text is an accurate portrayal of the creation process as many Ancient Astronaut theorists maintain, then by the words of the ancient texts themselves, the gods created kingship for some and not others. In this view, by default and on its face, some bloodlines are superior and others are inferior. In contrast, the biblical understanding of creation in its original context maintains that all races are equal because all races are human. All humans, male and female, are God’s images. Humans who follow God’s plan for salvation are all considered royal offspring. They are regarded as sons of God who will rule over a new Earth with Him.[ 257] This privilege is available for everyone who wants it. It doesn’t depend on one’s bloodline, race, or position in life. It is a gift made available to everyone by the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross.” (Derek Gilbert & Josh Peck, The Day the Earth Stands Still: Unmasking the Old Gods Behind ETs, UFOs, and the Official Disclosure Movement, 311-318 (Kindle Edition): Crane, MO: Defender)

I am not concerned with Anunnaki (whether they are aliens or not). They are created beings who are inferior to the one true God. Indeed, God’s Word makes it clear that these beings (along with any and all other supernatural powers) once worshipped the one true God and are exhorted to repent and do so again (Psalm 97:7; cf. Hebrews 1:6).

Finally, the evidence from the Sumerian texts regarding the Anunnaki demonstrates that these beings are none other than the angels who rebelled against God and their descendants, the Nephilim (Genesis 6:1-4)!

“Yet it goes even deeper into history. As with Greek myth and The Kumarbi Cycle, older texts from Mesopotamia record the transfer of power from generation to generation of gods—from sky-god Anu to “lord of the air” Enlil to Marduk, the patron god of Babylon. Along the way, the Anunnaki, once the most powerful gods of the Sumerian pantheon,[ 160] were reassigned to the underworld to serve as judges of the dead. West drew attention to the conceptual similarity of the (Hittite) “former gods” (karuilies siunes) with the Titans, called Προτεροι Θεοι in Theogony 424, 486. Both groups were confined to the underworld (with the apparent exceptions of Atlas and Prometheus), and as Zeus banished the Titans thither, so Tešup [Teshub] banished the karuilies siunes, commonly twelve in number, like the Titans. They were in turn identified with the Mesopotamian Anunnaki. These were confined by Marduk to the underworld, or at least some of them were (half the six hundred, Enuma Elish vi 39–47, see 41–44), where they were ruled over variously by Dagan or Shamash.[ 161] (Emphasis added) Working backward in time, we can link the Greek Titans to the Hittite “former gods” and then to the Mesopotamian Anunnaki. All of those groups are just different names for the “angels who sinned,” the Watchers of the Bible. In short: Titans = Hittite “former gods” = Anunnaki = Apkallu = Watchers. By the Old Babylonian period, the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Anunnaki were no longer the gods who decreed the fates of the living, they were the gods of the underworld. That’s why the reference to the Anunnaki in the Old Babylonian text of the Gilgamesh epic is so intriguing—it places their “secret dwelling” on and around Mount Hermon.[ 162] Since we discussed the connections between the dead and Hermon in an earlier chapter, you see the significance of the connection to the Anunnaki; it’s more evidence that we’re dealing with the same group of supernatural entities. We can identify several common elements shared by the Watchers, apkallu, Anunnaki, Hittite “former gods,” and the Titans: They ruled (or at least influenced, as messengers delivering the gifts of civilization to humanity) the natural realm in the distant past; they either transgressed against the high god or were overthrown by a new generation of gods; and they were subsequently banished or confined to the underworld by younger gods, a place identified by the Greeks and Hebrews as the abyss or Tartarus. In the case of the Watchers and apkallu, they were remembered also for having intimate relations with humans; and the leaders of the Titans and the “former gods,” Kronos and Kumarbi, attained their kingship by castrating their fathers. By connecting the myths of the ancient Greeks, Hittites, Hurrians, Amorites, and Sumerians, we’ve made a strong case that the characters we’ve known from high school mythology class, comic books, so-so Hollywood films, and novels aimed at young adult readers have a real basis in history. Not only that—they and their demigod offspring are in the Bible.” (Derek P. Gilbert, Last Clash Of The Titans: The Second Coming Of Hercules, Leviathan, And The Prophesied War Between Jesus Christ And The Gods Of Antiquity, 74-75 (Kindle Edition): Crane, MO: Defender)

The Anunnaki (whoever or whatever they are) will one Day bow down to the Lord Jesus Christ. He has defeated all the powers of darkness by the blood of His cross and resurrection from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:1-8; Colossians 2:11-15).

Will you not obey Him today?

Acts 2:38-Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.