by
Damen F. Mackey
“… you are at least an uneducated and indoctrinated individual, or the worst
and more plausible possibility, you are a liar who manipulate gullible people”.
Canadian student
A writer can perhaps feel like a person who has cast out a fishing line, and who has managed, for the most part, to get absolutely no reaction at the other end of the line.
It is far preferable, I think, to provoke a reaction, even if it is not a favourable one, than to have no response at all, as if the only thing at the end of the line is dead sea weed.
Anyway, a student from a Canadian university has reacted strongly to my article (revised slightly today, Passion of John the Baptist, August 29, 2024):
Yahweh, Solomon, Jerusalem - Ningirsu, Gudea and Girsu
(DOC) Yahweh, Solomon, Jerusalem - Ningirsu, Gudea and Girsu | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
And rightly so.
This article is not only most radical from a conventional point of view, it is even radical from a revisionist point of view – so much so that I would not expect even the most intrepid revisionists, on the whole, to approve of it.
Outrage, therefore, is what one would anticipate from a reader who has been attentive to what I have written, to its implications and ramifications.
And outrage is exactly what I got in the case of this Canadian student (of poor English):
Hi, I ending reading your paper, Yahweh, Solomon, Jerusalem - Ningirsu, Gudea and Girsu. And I have to say that you are far away from a rational conclusion with your lies that situated the writing of the bible way before the Sumerian civilisation. Which are been completely extinguish since the 19th century BCE. The Hebrew appears on the map around the 6th century BCE. A 1300 years gap, who have to be taken as evidence that you are at least an uneducated and indoctrinated individual, or the worst and more plausible possibility, you are a liar who manipulate gullible people. ….
[End of Message]
Whether I am “a liar” or “an uneducated … individual”, I’ll leave for others to decide. But who, I ask, could have - or even would want to have - “indoctrinated” me towards writing an article that goes against all previous versions of history?
To Judaïse Sumer, so-called, as I have done here, does not have a precedent as far as I am aware.
For a more general introduction to my deconstruction of the conventional “Sumer”, I would suggest that one reads these new articles of mine:
A new location proposed for Sumer
(1) A new location proposed for Sumer | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
“The Sumerian Problem” – Sumer not in Mesopotamia
(1) “The Sumerian Problem” – Sumer not in Mesopotamia | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
(2)
Southern Mesopotamia, far from having been “The Cradle of Civilization”, as is commonly thought, was actually an historically late starter, due in part to the lasting effects of the Noachic Flood in this low-lying region.
This has huge ramifications, too, for the Babel incident.
Comments