Re: Adam never met Eve

From: george murphy (
Date: Sat Nov 11 2000 - 11:39:16 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Adam never met Eve"

    Dick Fischer wrote:

    > Wayne wrote:
    >> Cain and Able were probably used when there was sibbling rivalries.
    >> Would that be a time to explain that this is not a true story? But
    >> when children are older and ask "where they real people?", it's
    >> right to honest. The best answer is three simple words: "I don't
    >> know".
    >> That's honest.
    > I submit we can be better than honest. We can be informed. Cain did
    > something we can substantiate. He built a city and named it "Enoch"
    > after his son. Enoch, or E-Anna(k), is named in the Sumerian king
    > list in the post-flood period. The name was corrupted to "Erech" the
    > Sumerian "Uruk." It appears on maps of southern Mesopotamia, and it
    > was excavated by archaeologists.

            I would like to see a citation from a recognized philologist
    with competence in these languages to the effect that "Erech" or "Uruk"
    is derived from "Enoch" - but I won't hold my breath. It reminds me of
    the claim of the apocryphal British Israelite claim that MacDonald is
    derived from Moses: Just drop the oses and add acDonald.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 11 2000 - 11:36:45 EST