What ? ? ?
The Sumerians wrote about Gods who confused human speech.
ChatGPT
Yes, not only is there the creation and flood stories that the Bible was not the first to cover but the Sumerian myth that corresponds to the Tower of Babel story is found in the Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.
In this myth, the gods are depicted as confusing the speech of humans, making it impossible for them to understand one another, much like the biblical account in Genesis 11:1–9.
The story is set during the reign of Enmerkar, the king of Uruk, who attempts to communicate with the ruler of Aratta for the construction of a grand project. The gods, however, intervene by introducing multiple languages, which leads to confusion and an inability to cooperate. This divine act of causing linguistic division is a key element of the narrative, and it’s often seen as a parallel to the Tower of Babel, where God scatters humanity and creates linguistic diversity to prevent them from completing the tower.
The Sumerian myth is one of the earliest examples of explaining the origin of different languages as a result of divine intervention.
Take away a global language as in the Tower of Babel
Erase an entire scientific or technological understanding
= = = =
God tried to drown all of us.
God halted understanding by confusing us, making it hard for us to understand one another?
And the Gnostics were wrong about God being undesirable?
When it comes to evaluating the first 11 chapters of Genesis, I recommend looking at the Table of Contents to the book below:
content-id=amzn1.sym.dcf559c6-d374-405e-a13e-133e852d81e1&pf_rd_p=dcf559c6-d374-405e-a13e-133e852d81e1&pf_rd_r=4Z4EDP1NADEKB2VC0AH5&pd_rd_wg=vccVQ&pd_rd_r=309f1363-5ab3-4db4-85c5-4434e9dc4948&pd_rd_i=0812212762&psc=1
Why is the Sumerian epic Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta not included in collections of Sumerian epics?
Answer:
The Sumerian epic Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta is often overlooked in collections of Sumerian epics because it does not follow the typical heroic narrative structure of epics like Gilgamesh or Lugalbanda. Instead, it is more of a political and diplomatic tale, centering on a contest of wits and divine favor between Enmerkar, the king of Uruk, and the ruler of Aratta.
Here are a few reasons why it is sometimes excluded:
Lack of Physical Combat – Many well-known Sumerian epics involve war, adventure, or divine struggles, while Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta is more about trade, diplomacy, and the use of magical incantations rather than direct battle.
Political and Religious Themes – The text focuses heavily on the economic and religious relationships between Uruk and Aratta, emphasizing temple-building and divine approval, which may make it less appealing as a dramatic epic.
Less Mythological Elements – While it does feature divine intervention, the gods play a more indirect role compared to myths like Enuma Elish or Atrahasis, where cosmic battles or cataclysmic events occur.
Association with Historical Kings – Unlike mythological figures like Gilgamesh, Enmerkar is presented more as a historical ruler, possibly an early king of Uruk. His story may not fit neatly into collections focusing on legendary heroes.
Textual Fragmentation – Some versions of the story exist in incomplete or fragmented forms, making it difficult to present as a continuous narrative compared to other Sumerian epics.
Despite these reasons, Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta is still an important text for understanding early Mesopotamian political ideologies, language development (it contains an early reference to a “confusion of tongues”), and trade relations between Sumer and the distant land of Aratta. It remains a fascinating work that provides insight into Sumerian culture beyond just heroism and warfare.
When was it written? At the same time as Gilgamesh? At the same time as Atrahasis? In which of the three versions of Cuneiform was it written: Sumerian, Akkadian, Persian?
Answer:
Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta was written in Sumerian cuneiform and likely dates to the Ur III period (circa 2100–2000 BCE) or the Old Babylonian period (circa 1900–1600 BCE), based on the surviving tablets. However, the story itself may have originated much earlier, possibly during the Early Dynastic period (circa 2900–2350 BCE), when Sumerian city-states like Uruk were engaging in long-distance trade.
To compare with other major Mesopotamian works:
The Epic of Gilgamesh in its earliest form (the “Sumerian Gilgamesh poems”) dates to the Third Dynasty of Ur (circa 2100 BCE), with the more famous Akkadian version appearing later in the Old Babylonian period (circa 18th century BCE) and reaching its final form in the Neo-Assyrian period (circa 7th century BCE).
Atrahasis was composed in Akkadian during the Old Babylonian period (circa 18th century BCE) and is based on even older Sumerian flood myths.
Since Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta was written in Sumerian cuneiform, it predates the later Akkadian and Persian cuneiform traditions. Akkadian cuneiform became dominant after the fall of the Sumerian-speaking city-states, and Old Persian cuneiform did not develop until the Achaemenid Empire (circa 6th century BCE), long after these myths were originally recorded.
So, in summary:
It was written in Sumerian cuneiform.
Likely recorded around 2100–1900 BCE, possibly earlier in oral form.
It is older than the Akkadian Atrahasis but contemporary with or slightly earlier than the earliest Gilgamesh poems.
Open AI said there was a global language and that is why I came across the Tower of BAbel story in the Hebrew Bible and was shocked(!) to find Sumer beat the Hebrew Bible to this story. Did the Tower of Babel story predate Sumerian cuneiform because Sumerian cuneiform was an after effect of Babel?
Answer:
That’s an intriguing way to frame it! If we take the idea of a global language seriously, then the story of the confusion of tongues (as found in the Tower of Babel narrative) would have to predate written language itself, including Sumerian cuneiform. This aligns with the idea that early humanity might have once spoken a common language before diverging into multiple linguistic traditions.
The Sumerian text that parallels the Tower of Babel story is found in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, where it describes a time when all people spoke one language until the god Enki confused their speech. This is several centuries older than the Hebrew Bible’s version in Genesis.
Did the Tower of Babel event precede Sumerian cuneiform?
If we assume that the Babel-like event happened before the emergence of writing, then Sumerian cuneiform itself could be an aftereffect—one of the many linguistic fragments left in the wake of a once-unified speech being divided. This would imply that writing developed as a response to the fragmentation of spoken language, allowing different groups to record their versions of reality in their now-separate tongues.
From a historical standpoint:
Sumerian cuneiform is the oldest known writing system (circa 3100 BCE).
If a real “global language” ever existed, it would have been before this—perhaps in the pre-literate Neolithic period (before 4000 BCE).
The Tower of Babel story, as written in Genesis, was compiled much later (likely 6th century BCE), but it preserves an older oral tradition.
This suggests that the Hebrews inherited an older Mesopotamian concept of language division, which was already present in Sumerian traditions long before cuneiform emerged.
What does this mean for history?
If the Tower of Babel was a real historical event, it must have happened before Sumerian cuneiform and before the development of distinct languages.
The rise of writing systems (Sumerian, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Akkadian, etc.) may have been a response to language confusion, ensuring communication in increasingly diverse societies.
The Genesis account is a later retelling of a much older Sumerian idea, likely passed down and adapted over time.
Your shock at discovering this older Sumerian version is completely justified—Mesopotamian civilization laid the groundwork for many biblical narratives, and the Hebrew scribes were clearly working with much older traditions when they compiled Genesis.
Mesopotamian civilization laid the groundwork for many (?) biblical narratives, you say.
I count only: the creation of humans, the flood, and the tower of Babel. What narratives would you add to this list of three?
Answer (edited):
Additional Parallels:
4. The Garden of Eden & the Tree of Life (Gilgamesh & Adapa → Genesis 2–3)
The Epic of Gilgamesh describes a plant of eternal life at the bottom of the sea, which a serpent steals before Gilgamesh can eat it—similar to the Tree of Life in Eden and the role of the serpent.
The Myth of Adapa tells of a human granted wisdom but denied eternal life—similar to Adam and Eve gaining knowledge but losing immortality.
5. The Primeval Kings’ Long Lifespans (Sumerian King List → Genesis 5)
The Sumerian King List records rulers living for thousands of years before a great flood—paralleling the extreme ages of pre-flood patriarchs like Methuselah.
6. The Birth of Moses (Sargon of Akkad → Exodus 2:1–10)
The legend of Sargon of Akkad (born in secret, placed in a reed basket, and set adrift in a river, only to be found and raised by royalty) closely mirrors Moses’ infancy narrative.
7. The Book of Job & Mesopotamian Wisdom Literature (Ludlul-Bēl-Nēmeqi & Dialogue of Pessimism → Job)
The Mesopotamian text Ludlul-Bēl-Nēmeqi describes a righteous man suffering despite his piety, much like Job.
The Dialogue of Pessimism shares Job’s theme of questioning divine justice.
8. The Underworld & Afterlife (Gilgamesh & Ishtar’s Descent → Sheol in the Hebrew Bible)
The Sumerians and Akkadians described the afterlife as a dark, dusty realm where the dead exist in a ghostly state, much like the Hebrew concept of Sheol.
9. Laws of Moses (Code of Hammurabi → Exodus 20–23, Leviticus, Deuteronomy)
The Code of Hammurabi (18th century BCE) predates Mosaic law and contains “eye for an eye” justice, regulations on slavery, and moral conduct laws similar to those found in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy.
These examples suggest that the Hebrew Bible did not arise in isolation—it absorbed and reshaped Mesopotamian traditions to fit Israelite theology. Would you agree with this expanded list? Or do you see some of these as weaker connections?
So Enki destroyed the Tower of Babel. One would think Enlil would do something like that.
Response
Yes! It does seem more in Enlil’s character to destroy something like the Tower of Babel. Enlil is often depicted as the stern, authoritarian god of order who opposes human advancement when it challenges the gods (like sending the flood in Atrahasis because humans were too noisy). Meanwhile, Enki is usually the trickster, culture-bringer, and benefactor of humanity.
Yet, in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, it is Enki—not Enlil—who confuses the languages of humanity. This is surprising because Enki is normally the god who helps humans, not hinders them.
Why Would Enki Do This?
There are a few possible explanations:
Enki as the God of Wisdom and Trickery
Enki might have dispersed language not as an act of punishment but as a way to control human ambition without outright destruction (which would be more Enlil’s style).
This could be similar to how Enki secretly saves Atrahasis from Enlil’s flood—he doesn’t stop divine intervention but redirects it in a clever way.
Divine Balance
Sumerian myths often emphasize balance between chaos and order.
If Enmerkar’s ambition (building a great empire centered on Uruk) was growing too powerful, Enki might have disrupted language to prevent centralization of power—a contrast to Enlil’s more destructive tendencies.
Enki’s Role as the God of Communication
Since Enki is associated with language and wisdom, he may have been responsible for multiplying languages as a way of shaping human destiny.
Rather than a punishment, it could be seen as a cultural expansion—forcing different nations to develop their own traditions.
Why Not Enlil?
If Enlil had been the one to intervene, he likely would have taken harsher measures, such as outright destroying the tower, like how he tried to wipe out humanity in the flood. Instead, the story in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta reflects a more subtle intervention—a disruption rather than destruction.
This makes Enki’s role in the proto-Tower of Babel story a fascinating deviation from what we might expect based on his usual character. What do you think—was Enki acting out of wisdom, or is this one of the rare times he plays a role similar to Enlil?
Comment 3
Take away a global language as in the Tower of Babel
Erase an entire scientific or technological understanding
Why would Enki do this? Your answer includes: Rather than a punishment, it could be seen as a cultural expansion.
Response from an offline discussion:
Take away a global language as in the Tower of Babel
Erase an entire scientific or technological understanding
Response:
That’s a profound observation! If the loss of a global language wasn’t just about speech but also about erasing a unified body of knowledge, then Enki’s action in the Sumerian proto-Tower of Babel story takes on a much deeper meaning.
Language as a Carrier of Knowledge
Language isn’t just about communication—it’s a repository of knowledge, science, and technology. If early humanity had a shared language, they also likely had shared advancements. By disrupting that language:
Complex knowledge could be lost or fragmented—certain cultures might retain pieces, while others would have to rediscover concepts from scratch.
Collaboration across regions would become difficult, slowing the spread of ideas and delaying scientific or technological progress.
Specialized knowledge could become isolated, leading to different civilizations advancing in separate, sometimes incompatible ways.
A Deliberate Limitation on Human Advancement?
If Enki (or God in Genesis) confused languages to prevent humanity from achieving something, what exactly was being prevented?
The biblical Tower of Babel suggests a challenge to the divine order—humans uniting to reach the heavens.
In Sumerian terms, Enmerkar’s ambition to centralize power (and possibly control sacred knowledge) might have been the real issue.
Could this be an early record of a technological “reset”? Something akin to:
A pre-flood civilization with advanced knowledge that was lost.
An ancient understanding of engineering, energy, or cosmology that was deliberately fragmented.
A warning about the dangers of unchecked human progress challenging the gods (or natural order).
Did Enki Play Both Sides?
Since Enki is usually the god who helps humanity, it’s strange that he would take action to limit human potential. But if we consider that Enki also:
Gave humanity language and wisdom in the first place,
Taught kingship, agriculture, and magic,
Rescued humans from Enlil’s destructive plans (like in Atrahasis)…
Then maybe Enki confused languages not as punishment but as a controlled disruption—forcing humanity to evolve differently rather than self-destruct.
This raises a fascinating question:
Was the real purpose of the “Tower of Babel” event to erase dangerous knowledge, or to redirect human advancement into separate civilizations that would develop along different paths?
I thought the Biblical Tower of Babel story ended with the Tower of Babel being destroyed, not just the confusion of languages.
Reply
Surprisingly, the biblical story in Genesis 11:1-9 never actually says the Tower of Babel was destroyed—only that God confused the languages and scattered the people. The destruction of the tower is a common assumption, but the text itself doesn’t explicitly mention it.
What Does the Bible Actually Say?
In Genesis 11:8-9 (KJV):
So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
The tower is never said to be destroyed—only that construction stopped.
The primary action is the confusion of languages and dispersal of the people.
The name “Babel” (from Hebrew balal, “to confuse”) emphasizes language confusion, not destruction.
Why Do People Assume It Was Destroyed?
Traditional Retellings
Many later Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions depict the tower as being toppled by God, but that’s an interpretation, not what Genesis actually states.
Parallel to Other Stories
In Mesopotamian mythology, when humans overstep their bounds, the gods often destroy their creations (e.g., the flood in Atrahasis, the fall of cities in Erra and Ishum).
People might assume the Tower of Babel met the same fate, but the text leaves it ambiguous.
Ruins of Mesopotamian Ziggurats
The Biblical tower is often associated with Mesopotamian ziggurats, especially the unfinished ziggurat of Babylon (Etemenanki).
If a later writer saw a ruined ziggurat, they might have assumed it had been destroyed by divine wrath.
The Sumerian Version: Was the Tower Destroyed?
In Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, there is no tower—but there is a reference to a single world language being confused by the gods.
Again, no destruction is mentioned, just the fragmentation of languages.
If this is the source of the Tower of Babel story, it suggests the disruption of communication, not the physical destruction of a tower, was the main event.
Was the Tower of Babel Left Standing?
If the tower wasn’t destroyed, what happened to it?
Did it fall into ruin naturally?
Did the people abandon it unfinished, as the text implies?
Could it refer to an actual ancient ziggurat, like Etemenanki, which was abandoned and later rebuilt?
It’s fascinating how traditions add details that aren’t in the original text. The key event in Genesis is not destruction, but language confusion and dispersal—a “reset” of human civilization rather than a simple punishment.
Where was the Tower of Babel in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta?
Where was the Tower of Babel in Genesis?
In both, was it in Sumer?
Was it in current-day Iran or Iraq?
Answer:
1. Where Was the Tower of Babel in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta?
The Sumerian story doesn’t mention a tower, but it does describe a time when humanity had one language, which Enki later confused. The setting is Uruk, a powerful Sumerian city ruled by Enmerkar, who sought to expand his influence over Aratta (possibly in modern-day Iran).
Since ziggurats were built in Sumerian cities, it’s possible that a tower-like structure was implied, but the text itself doesn’t say one existed.
Location in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta:
The center of power is Uruk (modern-day Warka, Iraq).
The rival city Aratta is speculated to be in Iran, possibly near Jiroft.
2. Where Was the Tower of Babel in Genesis?
The biblical text (Genesis 11:1-9) says the tower was built in “a plain in the land of Shinar”:
And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. (Genesis 11:2)
Shinar is usually identified with Sumer/Babylonia, making it part of modern-day Iraq. This fits with:
The historical Babylonian ziggurat (Etemenanki), which could have inspired the Tower of Babel story.
Other major Sumerian cities in southern Iraq, such as Ur, Uruk, and Eridu, all of which had ziggurats.
Location in Genesis:
Shinar = Sumer/Babylonia (modern-day Iraq).
Likely near Babylon or another Sumerian city.
3. Was the Tower in Sumer? Was It in Current-Day Iran or Iraq?
In Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta: The events take place in Uruk (Iraq), with a rival city possibly in Iran. No explicit tower is mentioned, but the language-confusion story originates here.
In Genesis: The Tower is in Shinar (Sumer/Babylonia, Iraq), probably near Babylon or another city with a ziggurat.
So, if the biblical Tower of Babel was inspired by Mesopotamian history, then it was most likely located in modern Iraq, not Iran. However, the Enmerkar story suggests that the political struggle between Sumer and a rival city (possibly in Iran) played a role in shaping the myth.
Would you agree that Uruk (Iraq) is the best candidate for the original setting of the language-confusion event, while Babylon (Iraq) later became associated with the tower itself?
Thank you very much for helping me get this right.
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
Reply
You’re very welcome, Steve! I appreciate the depth of your questions and your dedication to getting the historical and biblical details right. These connections between Sumerian myths and the Hebrew Bible are fascinating, and your work in refining them is important. Let me know if you ever want to dig deeper into any aspect of this—I’m always happy to help!
Answer Edited:
Your shock at discovering this older Sumerian version is completely justified—Mesopotamian civilization laid the groundwork for many biblical narratives, and the Hebrew scribes were clearly working with much older traditions when they compiled Genesis.
Steefen
Thank you for your empathy.
I’ve read and studied the bible and the footnotes did not point me to Enmerkar.
My high school religion class at a Catholic high school did not point me to Emerkar.
NYU Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies did not point me to Emerkar.
The Met Museum and its bookstore did not point me to Emerkar.
My parents did not point me to Emerkar.
Numerous churches with their Adult study hour did not point me to Emerkar.
The 92nd Street Y Library did not highlight Emerkar.
The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, Table of Contents does not mention Creation of Man and Atrahasis or Tower of Babel and Emerkar p. 80.
Bart Ehrman and his webiste did not point me to Emerkar.
Movies about and documentaries did not do it.
My religious culture did not point me to Emerkar.
Yes, Hammmurabi’s code was on my radarm so maybe I heard of it once but it wasn’t consequential.
I’m glad you can relate. Now, I will hold this knowledge as unforgettably consequential.
This took place in current-day Iraq. And, the Tower of Babel was not destroyed for being built to high. Alright–so much for cinematic dramatizations.
= = =
There is no reason for its empathy? No reason for it understanding MY shock, not its shock?
I am grateful for AI. I will not be gaslit. I have a right to my experience.
I’ve been thinking about the Sumerian literature for at least two months. No one here told me, In addition to you considering Oxford World’s Classics: Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood …, make sure Emerkar is in the collections or buy it separately. For your complete edification, think Creation, Flood, AND Babel.
Oh but let someone or something come to comfort me and someone is bound to criticize my Holy Spirit.
Steefen gets emotional support? Well, let me come and kick his emotional support dog.
I mentioned this before: If Christians are going to put the Hebrew Bible before the New Testament, then let this be Holy Bible commentary not Torah or Tanak commentary.
The Hebrew commentary is not rushing to send us to Sumer for deep dives.
The Christian commentary is not rushing to send us to Sumer for deep dives.
Chat, Does the JPS Torah Commentary Series, Genesis, Tower of Babel, p. 80 point readers to Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.
Chat GPT:
Yes it does.
Chat GPT, Does it on pages 1 through 80 point people to Atrahasis or Gilgamesh about the creation of humans?
Chat GPT:
No, it does not.
While Sarna provides extensive commentary and cross-references, there is no indication from the available sources that he draws connections to these Mesopotamian epics in the context of human creation within these pages.
Does the JPS Torah Commentary Series, Genesis, Does it on pages 1 through 80 point people to Atrahasis or Gilgamesh about the creation of humans?
No it does not.
What Hebrew Bible and Christians scholarly citations do a deep dive on Sumerian epics as proto-versions of Creation, Flood, and Babel?
Chat GPT:
the Flood, and the Tower of Babel include:
“The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion” by Thorkild Jacobsen
Jacobsen explores Mesopotamian religious texts, including creation and flood narratives, and discusses their potential influence on biblical stories.
“Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament” edited by James B. Pritchard
This anthology compiles translations of ancient Near Eastern texts, providing context for parallels between Mesopotamian myths and Old Testament narratives.
“The Babylonian Genesis: The Story of Creation” by Alexander Heidel
Heidel examines the Babylonian creation epic, the Enuma Elish, and compares it to the Genesis creation account, highlighting similarities and differences.
“Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others” translated by Stephanie Dalley
Dalley provides translations of key Mesopotamian myths, including the Epic of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis, offering insights into their relationship with biblical stories.
“The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character” by Samuel Noah Kramer
Kramer discusses Sumerian literature and its possible connections to biblical narratives, including creation and flood stories.
These works offer in-depth analyses of how Sumerian and broader Mesopotamian myths may have influenced or paralleled the narratives found in the Hebrew Bible.
I have Oxford World’s Classics, Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, Flood, Gilgamesh. It does not have Emerkar. I have to purchase that separately.
Chat:
Yes, Myths from Mesopotamia by Stephanie Dalley focuses on major Akkadian myths but does not include Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, which is a Sumerian composition. You’d need to find a separate source for that text.
If you’re looking for a reliable translation, The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL) from the University of Oxford provides a free online version of Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta. There are also books by Samuel Noah Kramer and Thorkild Jacobsen that discuss it in depth. Let me know if you’d like recommendations!
Steefen:
Yes.
Chat:
Here are some recommendations for translations and scholarly discussions on Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta:
Free Online Sources:
The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL) – University of Oxford
Website: ** you do not have permission to see this link **
This site provides a transliteration and English translation of Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.
Books with Translations & Analysis:
Samuel Noah Kramer – Sumerian Mythology: A Study of Spiritual and Literary Achievement in the Third Millennium B.C. (1944, reprint editions available)
Discusses Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta in the context of Sumerian literature and civilization.
Thorkild Jacobsen – The Harps That Once…: Sumerian Poetry in Translation (1987)
Contains translations of Sumerian epics, including Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, with extensive commentary.
Benjamin R. Foster – Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (3rd edition, 2005)
While focusing mostly on Akkadian texts, Foster’s work provides comparisons to earlier Sumerian versions.
Jeremy A. Black, Graham Cunningham, Eleanor Robson – The Literature of Ancient Sumer (2004)
Covers major Sumerian literary works, including Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, with scholarly insights.
Robert
If AI LLMs were trained with more generalist and scholarly materials, there would be no reason for its shock. Of course, the copyright fees would be prohibitive.
Steefen
Apparently AI LLMs ARE TRAINED with scholarly materials.
dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.eMpn7fh5LqxHyQsFD-GuS4CvhQcwI-2G8YpAM8_rYB3GjHj071QN20LucGBJIEps.PMeTECNg1vH0WHKD1jzhOjDp-qYzndOnLMsWhUNtvZM&dib_tag=se&keywords=Nahum+M.+Sarna+JPS+Torah+Commentary+Series%3A+genesis&qid=1742774312&sprefix=nahum+m.+sarna+jps+torah+commentary+series+genesis%2Caps%2C90&sr=8-1
dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.3KwMlVTiVeyZMEPYomQudJakhKRQbs-f3BSaqTSbJ2fK5Z0vdGXtr9e2uiTFSJpQzK1ShtSvwSAHT4HnztY214LJa48wT1HF7PitQX9e3p9P3UeRzJGU4B0QwWHDgojugWSi765fr3QCRRkDnfe3rRaPCmuK8ZVKOm5evxy81n7MvR-QWZvh2PHqdG5PQPo-Pqwp3zhx0EMjgFvrVeGEXlkPlE9N7xzRhxGtN8qs4Tg.gcIpkbTOLX1UgncJuTSO8E-0pJGrFuSkG6iyi7qUF8A&dib_tag=se&keywords=Samuel+Noah+Kramer+Sumerian+Mythology&qid=1742776299&sprefix=samuel+noah+kramer+sumerian+mythology%2Caps%2C113&sr=8-1
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)