No place is godforsaken, unless it be the cities of men. —Evan Eisenberg (From The Mountain And The Tower: Wilderness And City In The Symbols Of Babylon And Israel)
When it comes to the biblical character named Nimrod there is no shortage of theories. Some have enough credibility to be explored. Others, like a popular satirical claim of Hebrew Roots Internet bloggers that he is “Santa Claus” are really not worth giving any attention to (if you would like to know the real origins of the Santa Claus character, I have prepared a study specifically on that titled Meet Santa Claus).
There are a mere three mentions of this Nimrod in The Bible—first in Genesis 10, then in 1 Chronicles 1, and finally a mention not of the man but the land eventually named after him in Micah 5. So why would so much attention be given to a man of whom The Bible gives so little attention? I believe that the answer to this can be found in what is said about him in the Genesis record.
Now Cush fathered Nimrod. He started to become mighty in the land. He was a mighty hunter before Adonai. This is why it is said, “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before Adonai.” The beginning of his kingdom included Babel, Erech, Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. From that land he went out to Assyria and built Nineveh, Rechovot-ir, Calah and Resen, between Nineveh and Calah—it is the great city. ~Genesis 10:8-12 (TLV)
In this passage we find that this Nimrod is called a mighty hunter before ADONAI and that he built cities. Prior to this point in Scripture there is no record of a city, so it seems that this Nimrod is likely the person who invented the concept of a city. Turning over to the next chapter in Genesis we also find out that what was done in these cities, the building of the ziggurat towers, was met with God’s wrath.
Now the entire earth had the same language with the same vocabulary. When they traveled eastward, they found a valley-plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. They said to one another, “Come! Let’s make bricks and bake them until they’re hard.” So they used bricks for stone, and tar for mortar.
Then they said, “Come! Let’s build ourselves a city, with a tower whose top reaches into heaven. So let’s make a name for ourselves, or else we will be scattered over the face of the whole land.”
Then Adonai came down to see the city and the tower that the sons of man had built. Adonai said, “Look, the people are one and all of them have the same language. So this is what they have begun to do. Now, nothing they plan to do will be impossible. Come! Let Us go down and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand each other’s language.”
So Adonai scattered them from there over the face of the entire land, and they stopped building the city. This is why it is named Babel, because Adonai confused the languages of the entire world there, and from there Adonai scattered them over the face of the entire world. ~Genesis 11:1-9 (TLV)
The tower and city model is biblically the ultimate act of defiance to the model of God’s Garden. When God created man He placed him in a garden that flourished by four rivers that flowed out of Eden. There was no such thing as an infrastructure. It was a natural paradise. The weather conditions must have been absolutely perfect because the Scripture records that clothing wasn’t even used prior to the choice to partake of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.
When God placed man in His Garden, He charged Adam with the care of all Creation. Genesis 1:26-28 says, taken from The Message Bible: “’Let us make human beings in our image, make them reflecting our nature so they can be responsible for the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, the cattle, and, yes, Earth itself, and every animal that moves on the face of Earth.’ God created human beings; he created them godlike, Reflecting God’s nature. He created them male and female. God blessed them: ‘Prosper! Reproduce! Fill Earth! Take charge! Be responsible for fish in the sea and birds in the air, for every living thing that moves on the face of Earth.’” Then in Genesis 2:15, as it is rendered from the New English Translation, it says: “The Lord God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for it and to maintain it.”
So long as Adam would have obeyed the commandment of God and refrained from partaking of the Tree of Knowledge the Earth would have been under a system of Creation Care and mankind would have eaten freely from the Tree of Life. The rejection of the commandment and eating of the fruit of the prohibited tree resulted in a trading of the system of Creation Care for the system of creative capabilities. Thus today, instead of living in a world under the system of Creation Care with the choice to refrain from the knowledge of creative capabilities, we now live in a world where humanity possesses creative capabilities and individuals have to choose to take up the original calling to care for The Creation.
Because humanity traded life under the system of Creation Care for the system of creative capabilities those who find the truth and seek a return to humanity’s original purpose must still do this work within the laws of the system of creative capabilities. This is why even in caring for the Earth, tending to Creation, we must rely on tools created by the hands of men. This is also why the process of redemption required the building of structures like the Tabernacle and later the Temple, because even God must work within the system that man chose to live under.
Now, if this all sounds a little too mystical for you, let me simplify it—as I certainly do not endorse mysticism. Humanity was created to live in a garden paradise. There was a choice offered up through two trees. One tree would allow them to stay in the garden paradise, never having to create anything and forever living in a perfect world. The other choice was to obtain knowledge, but with a hefty price tag attached to it. Adam and Eve made their choice, and sin entered the world. It’s just that simple.
You see, in this message I will be talking a bit about Nimrod and the choices he made, at least according to The Bible and other supporting historical texts. Some are of the persuasion that because Nimrod was a son of Cush who was a son of Ham, and because Ham apparently did the wrong thing in exposing his father’s nakedness that this aligns sin back to the lineage of Ham after the flood. In some heavily racist interpretations of Scripture this presents a view that “dark-skinned” people are evil. But look, Adam and Eve were the ones who brought sin into the world, and despite theories that associate the sons of Noah with particular “races” or skin-tones you can’t do that with Adam and Eve. Both Adam and Eve and Noah and his family were most likely were a middle-brown skin tone as they possessed all of the genetic information that developed the diversity we see today, but that is another message for another time.
We may really have no idea what these early peoples looked like, though we can make a solid educated guess based on how actual biology works, but we do know that they were the first to sin and because of them ALL HAVE SINNED and fall short of the glory of God (Isaiah 53:6, Romans 3:23). Sin cannot be pinned on any “race”, nationality, ethnicity, or people group. Sin came through Adam and Eve, and all people are connected to them regardless of the theories people come up with about later biblical characters.
Something worth noting is that the concept of “races” is a false construct not supported biblically or biologically. It originates from the dispersion of people at the Tower of Babel. The first documented record of “races” or “racial classifications” is from the Egyptian Book of Gates. This shows that the concept of “races”, which is a false construct, comes from the two ancient religions that The Bible was written in direct opposition to. This is why The Bible makes no distinctions of “races” anywhere in the text. It recognizes people from various nations, but never by “race” classifications.
Many people believe “racism” and “being racist” is solely an act of hatred based on the classifications of “races”. But this is not true. That is a form of “racism” or “being racist”, but these ideologies are much broader than people realize. Adding the suffixes “ism” and “ist” to the word “race”, with the entire concept of “races” being a false construct built on ancient pagan religious beliefs, means that any acknowledgement of “races” is “racism” and those who make the acknowledgement “racist”. This means that even if you identify yourself by the false classifications of “races”—such as white, black, red, or yellow—that very act makes you a “racist” the same way having a theory makes you a theorist or believing in a god or gods makes you a theist. This is important to understanding how to end “racism”, because as long as people acknowledge the ancient pagan belief in “races” there will be “racism”, regardless of whether there is “racial hatred” through “racism”.
Nimrod made a wrong choice, that much seems to be clear in the biblical record—and extrabiblical records, which I will present, seem to strengthen that argument. Some contend that as of Genesis 10:8-9 he was still good, that he had not yet strayed away from God. This is not my belief. I feel that there is overwhelmingly abundant evidence that this man The Bible calls Nimrod had already begun his course of defying God upon his mention in Genesis 10:8-9 when he is called “a mighty hunter before ADONAI” in many English Bibles. After all, his mention is completely separated from the other sons of Cush, presumably his brothers. I will go through some reasons why I believe this, but ultimately whether you believe his departure from the God of his fathers was in verse 8 or verse 10, it seems almost unanimous that by verse 10 he was no longer in the will of God. As I am talking about the model of the mountain/garden (God’s Creation) and the tower/city (man’s creation) it does not hold a great deal of importance as to whether or not Nimrod was already wicked prior to verse 10. However, this is a study of this man so we will examine both perspectives of verses 8 and 9.
A Mighty Hunter, Or A Tyrant Warrior?
One thing that has been proposed to me is that the name Nimrod means “hunter” by definition. This is a complete misconception when you study out the etymology of the word. The word “nimrod” was only first used in this sense in 1712 where it appears in an English publication called The Spectator from the Tuesday May 6, 1712 entry where it is stated:
‘As you have somewhere declared that extraordinary and uncommon characters of mankind are the game which you delight in, and as I look upon you to be the greatest sportsmen, or, if you please, the Nimrod among this species of writers, I thought this discovery would not be unacceptable to you.’
Another consideration that we must look at is how the word nimrod was used in the 1980’s, originating it appears in 1983, in cultural American youth slang as a word to call people “stupid, dumb, idiotic, nerdy, etc.” This was a very popular slang at the time, which I actually remember. It is no more appropriate to say that the name Nimrod, referring specifically to The Bible character and its definition in Hebrew, means stupid or dumb than to say that it means hunter. It is totally inappropriate to assign a definition based on an English word originated from it to an ancient Hebrew word that has it’s own meaning. Or to say it another way, you can’t say that because nimrod in English meant “hunter” in the early 18th century or “stupid, dumb” in the 1980s that it meant these things in ancient Israel. Clearly, as we will see, it did not.
There is another thing that needs to be considered prior to moving into the second concept of what Nimrod’s name means. Some statements are made in the extremely controversial Book of Jasher—that most scholars consider a medieval forgery, with the earliest known copies being from the 17th century—that need to be evaluated for our study. Despite several conflicts with Genesis and a claim made in this questionable document that Nimrod received his strength from the same animal skins originally given by God to Adam and Eve, some would like to refer to the claim made by this writing that he was a mighty hunter in the field, and he hunted the animals and he built altars, and he offered upon them the animals before the Lord (Jasher 7:30).
The problem with using a source like the Book of Jasher, in addition to it likely being forgery, is that these claims do not line up with other historical documents that can be validated as authentic in antiquity. You see, the problem with some of these extrabiblical writings floating around today is that people assume that their mention in Scripture—in the case of Jasher, Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18—means that we should regard them for their historical value. When it comes to works that can be validated as historically authentic like 1 and 2 Maccabees, the Talmud, the works of Flavius Josephus, or Ecclesiasticus then yes we can refer to them for their historical value.
When the best information says a book referred to in Joshua 10 by the same name appears to be a forgery from no earlier than 1625 and it is filled with wild claims that don’t match up with other historical documents and even contradicts The Bible then we shouldn’t even really entertain what it says. Of this questionable writing namesd the Book of Jasher, or Sefer HaYashar, the respected Rabbi Leon Modena (1571-1648) of Venice says in his Ari Nohem:
Behold, it [the Zohar] is like Sefer haYashar, which they printed (without my knowledge and without the knowledge of the sages here in Venice, about twenty years ago). Although I removed the fantasies and falsehoods from it, [e.g.,] that it is the Sefer haYashar mentioned in Scripture, there are still those who claim that it was discovered during the time of the destruction [of the temple]. But who can stop those who imagine in their minds whatever they wish.
Basically, within about 20 years of the appearance of this alleged Book of Jasher, this prominent Rabbi calls it a fantasy, a falsehood, and not the same Book of Jasher mentioned in The Bible. It is also worth noting that the Rabbi compares this work to the Zohar, which is the major text in Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism). This is no surprise really as this Sefer HaYashar (midrash) also makes the wild claim that the animals skins God gave to Adam and Eve were passed down through the generations, taken onto the ark with Noah, stolen by Ham, and ended up being given to Nimrod where they allegedly became the source of his power—I know I already mentioned that, but it is so ridiculous it bears another mention. When the only historical source that seems to “validate” a theory is a highly controversial work said to be a complete forgery and associated with something as demonic as kabbalah, there is a very good chance those who embrace it are not embracing truth. It really doesn’t matter much what you “think” God showed you in The Bible. And clearly this appears to be the only, or at least the earliest, source to claim Nimrod was this “stellar feller” who served God before he “got off track” and defied God.
Having settled the matter with Jasher and where the idea that Nimrod means “hunter” comes from, let’s move now to what real history tells us about this name and how that relates to Genesis 10:8-9. Take a look through this list of credible and accepted sources and what they say about this elusive biblical character:
A Divine Voice came and said to him: Wicked man, son of a wicked man, descendant, i.e., follower of the ways, of Nimrod the wicked, who caused the entire world to rebel against Him during the time of his reign. —Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Chagigah, 13a:2
And one said: Amraphel was his name. And why was his name called Nimrod? Because he caused the entire world to rebel [himrid] against God during his reign. —Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Eruvin 53a:7
[Note the Hebrew word himrid (שהמריד) used in Tractate Eruvin 53a:7. This word seems to mean more than just “the rebellion”. Some sources say it is expanded to “led in rebellion” or “led the rebellion”. Thus, combined with the name Nimrod, the Hebrew שהמריד נמרוד used in this Talmud entry would actually translate “Nimrod led the rebellion” (against God).]
Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said: What response did the Divine Voice answer to that wicked man, Nebuchadnezzar, when he said: “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:14)? A Divine Voice emerged and said to him: Wicked man, son of a wicked man, the disciple in corruption of Nimrod the wicked, who caused the entire world to rebel against Me during his reign by advising the generation of the dispersion to build a tower in order to fight the Hosts of Heaven, how many are the years of a person altogether? Seventy years, and if he is with strength, eighty years, as it is stated: “The days of our years are seventy years and with strength eighty years” (Psalms 90:10). —Talmud Pesachim
After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram (Gen. 15:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: The wicked earneth false wages, but he that soweth righteousness hath a sure reward (Prov. 11:18). The wicked earneth false wages refers to the evil Nimrod, who erected idols and led mankind astray. Idolatry is coupled with falsehood, as it is said: His molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them (Jer. 10:14). But he that soweth righteousness hath a sure reward alludes to Abraham, who sowed righteousness by feeding passers-by and travelers, as it is said: And Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beer-sheba, and called thereupon the name of the Lord, the everlasting God (Gen. 21:33). —Midrash Tanchuma
(Gen. 11:6) – he answered to them: here the Holy One bent the head of Nimrod and said: “”this” [one] will make them rebel against Me.” —Bereishit Rabbah 26:4 (A Talmudic period midrash containing Rabbinic interpretations of Genesis)
It was said before Abraham was born. Nimrod was a heretic concerning the truth of the lord blessed be he. He was conceited and he said that he himself was a God. And the people of his time served and bowed to him. He was so – an established king, and he was wise and he saw in the wisdom of the stars that there will be one man born in his time that will oppose him and deny him from his faith and he will be victorious over him. —Otzar Midrashim
גבור להיות
TO BE A MIGHTY ONE — Mighty in causing the whole world to rebel against the Holy One, blessed be He, by the plan he devised for the generation that witnessed the separation of the races (הפלגה דור)to build the Tower of Babel (Genesis Rabbah 23:7).
ציד גבור
A MIGHTY HUNTER — He ensnared the minds of people by his words, misleading them to rebel against the Omnipresent (Genesis Rabbah 37:2).
‘ה לפני
BEFORE THE LORD — intending purposely to provoke Him to His face.
יאמר כן על
WHEREFORE IT IS SAID — Regarding any man who brazenly acts wickedly — knowing his Master and yet of set purpose rebelling against Him — it is said. “This man is like Nimrod a mighty hunter” (Sifra, Bechukotai, Section 2 1-2).
—Rashi On Genesis (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki’s commentary on the book of Genesis)
ה לפני ציד גבור
“a great hunter before the Lord, i.e. throughout the earth. “ We find a similar use of the expression when in the Book of Jonah (Jonah 3,3) the city of Nineveh is described as גדולה עיר לאלוקים, “a great city before G-d,” where the expression means that on the whole globe there was no city comparable in size of population. —Chizkuni
Genesis 10:8 – In causing the entire world to rebel. [Rashi explains החל as “rebel”] because otherwise, [if it meant “began,”] why should it say החל? Nimrod was not the first to rebel against Hashem. Back in the days of Enosh it already says (4:26), אז הוחל לקרא. Perforce, החל is related to the word חילול. I.e., Nimrod publicly desecrated Hashem’s Name [by rebelling against Him]. (Kitzur Mizrachi) But it seems to me that החל must mean “began”. For if meant “rebel”, why does it say [גבור] twice? It should [combine the verses and] say, הוא החל להיות גבור ציד לפני ה’. But if it means “began,” the verse is understandable as is. Scripture is saying: “He was the first one who began to be powerful in causing rebellion, and he was a mighty hunter before Hashem, intentionally provoking Him.” (Nachalas Yaakov)
Genesis 10:9 – He intentionally provoked Him. Rashi is answering the question: Wherever Nimrod is, he is “before Hashem.” [So what is the meaning of “before Hashem”? —Siftei Chakhamim
His name, which literally means “we shall rebel,” is in keeping with the practice of an arbitrary and violent control over men’s persons and property. —Barnes Noted On The Bible
The name itself, Nimrod from מרד, “we will revolt,” points to some violent resistance to God. It is so characteristic that it can only have been given by his contemporaries, and thus have become a proper name. —Keil And Delitzsch Biblical Commentary On The Old Testament
Nimrod; the rebel, from maradh, to rebel; the name of a person, not of a people; – Namuret in ancient Egyptian. … Eastern tradition has painted Nimrod as a gigantic oppressor of the people’s liberties and an impious rebel-against the Divine authority. Josephus credits him with having instigated the building of the tower of Babel. He has been identified with the Orion of the Greeks. —Pulpit Commentary
His tyranny came into a proverb as hated both by God and man: for he did not cease to commit cruelty even in God’s presence. —The Geneva Study Bible
Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah,—a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means that they were happy; but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny,—seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his own power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again: for that he would build a Tower too high for the waters to be able to reach; and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers!
Now the multitude were very ready to follow the determination of Nimrod, and to esteem it a piece of cowardice to submit to God: and they built a tower, neither sparing any pains, nor being in any degree negligent about the work. And, by reason of the multitude of hands employed in it, it grew very high, sooner than any one could expect; but the thickness of it was so great, and it was so strongly built, that thereby its great height seemed, upon the view, to be less than it really was. It was built of burnt brick, cemented together with morter, made of bitumen; that it might not be liable to admit water. When God saw that they acted so madly, he did not resolve to destroy them utterly, since they were not grown wiser by the destruction of the former sinners: but he caused a tumult among them, by producing in them diverse languages: and causing, that through the multitude of those languages, they should not be able to understand one another. The place wherein they built the Tower is now called Babylon; because of the confusion of that language which they readily understood before; for the Hebrews mean by the word Babel, Confusion. The Sibyl also makes mention of this tower, and of the confusion of the language when she says thus:—“When all men were of one language, some of them built a high tower, as if they would thereby ascend up to heaven. But the gods sent storms of wind and overthrew the tower, and gave every one his peculiar language; and for this reason it was that the city was called Babylon.” But as to the plan of Shinar, in the country of Babylonia, Hestiæus mentions it, when he says thus:—“Such of the priests as were saved took the sacred vessels of Jupiter Enyalius, and came to Shinar of Babylonia.” —Josephus, Antiquities Of The Jews
These sources trace back to the Babylonian Talmud, developed from Jewish thought going back to the period of Babylonian Captivity recorded in the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible, or “Old Testament”), the first century work of the highly respected Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus, forward to great thinkers like Rashi, and on through Jewish and Christian commentary on this man through the centuries. But if this is not convincing enough about who this man was, we can also turn to a detailed analysis of what his name means in Hebrew.
We already reviewed the information supporting the view that Nimrod means “hunter” and that in Genesis 10:8-9 the biblical character by this name hunted wild game and offered it to Yahweh. Now, instead of taking the definition given to an English word, we will examine the Hebrew word נִמְרֹ֑ד. This is the name rendered Nimrod in English and is comprised of the root מָרַד with the Hebrew letter nun (נ) before it. The Hebrew מָרַד is typically rendered marad, which means “to rebel”. The addition of the nun in front is typical of Semitic language toward creating a name. In this form the nun would make the sound “Ni”, thus forming Ni-marad, or Nimrod.
This use of nun is also found in the word ani (אני), which refers to expressions like “I”, “You”, “He”, or “She”. As such the name Nimrod could be rendered: I rebel, You Rebel, He/She rebels. Or, as the late archaeologist David P. Livingston, Ph.D. says in his article Who Was Nimrod?: “The Rebel”, written in capital letters as a formal designation, not just a rebel but The Rebel. Keep in mind, Genesis was written by Moses so it is entirely possible that by his lifetime this man was only known among the Hebrew people as Nimrod, which may not have even been his actual name (more on that in a moment).
Jeff Benner of the Ancient Hebrew Research Center makes a couple of additional notes about Nimrod that are worth considering. First, in his Mechanical Translation Of Torah he points out that in Genesis 10:9 the word often rendered “before” is the Hebrew לִפְנֵי, which means “face”. This supports what Rashi says in his commentary about Nimrod being a hunter in the face of God. We will touch on this more in the next section. The other thing Benner points out in his brief article Nimrod is: “One final clue into the character into the personality of Nimrod is how the Semitic root MRD has been used even into our own time. The Ancient Semitic root MRD (marad) is the origin of our words MaRauDer and MuRDer.”
Something else we must consider, in evaluating who the biblical Nimrod was, is the use of the Hebrew word “gibbor” (גִּבּוֹר) in Genesis 10:8-9 and 1 Chronicles 1:10. This is the word commonly translated “warrior” in Scripture. It is defined in Strong’s Concordance (1368) as: champion, chief, excel, giant, man, one, strong man, warrior, tyrant.
This word appears 159 times in the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible). It is used in both a positive/good sense and in a negative/wicked sense. To determine whether or not its use in a particular passage is positive, such as “valiant warriors for Yahweh”, or negative, such a tyrant warriors against Yahweh and His people, often additional context and further examination of the specific form of the word must be considered.
In regard to the word “gibbor”, it appears in Genesis 10:8-9 as גִּבֹּ֖ר—the only place in the Hebrew Bible where this form of the word appears. This makes this rendering unique to other uses of the word in Scripture. In digging into this specific use of the word, it appears as a noun it is used either to refer to a strong man or a rooster/cock. This deviates from the base form of the word, גִּבּוֹר, which means “hero”, and is more neutral—while a different Hebrew word is used, “benayim”, when Goliath is referred to as a “hero, champion” in 1 Samuel 17:4. Something worth considering with this is how roosters can be vicious with each other, thus the reason “cock fights” are a longstanding form of underground gambling activities. As a verb, this form of the word (גִּבֹּ֖ר) means: to become stronger, gain power, overpower, conquer, vanquish, defeat.
While the word is used as a noun in Genesis 10:8-9, we should not quickly dismiss the verb meaning as it will relate to the pattern seen in the names of Nimrod’s cities, which we will discuss later in this message. A seemingly minor change to the spelling of the word actually drastically changes it from someone who is a “hero” to someone who more specifically, as we see in the narrative of Nimrod, is a tyrant warrior. The addition or subtraction of the Hebrew “וֹ” in this word is the difference between it being either a positive or neutral form, that could be “good” or “bad”, and a negative rendering. Also, as already noted, it’s form in reference to Nimrod is exclusive to Genesis 10:8-9.
Interestingly, I have encountered people who try to argue against this abundance of evidence about Nimrod in favor of the views that he was a “good guy who went astray”. One of the things stated to dismiss this history, theology, and proper understanding of the Hebrew name for this man to me is the statement “white people wrote those things”. This was being done to support a “black theology”, but as I have already established “race” is a false construct built on Babylonian and Egyptian paganism. There is no such thing as “white people” and “black people”, every human is a shade of brown no matter how light or dark a shade they might be. I find it interesting that a major driving force in a belief that Nimrod was a “good guy” who made offerings to God, a view historically supported only by a 17th Century A.D. kabbalist writing, is built on “racism” that has its origin in the evil of Nimrod’s activities in building “cities”. Thus a belief that Nimrod started out good is built on “racist” beliefs—and anyone who would dismiss so much actual history because “white people” wrote it and it does not support their “black theology” that they think God showed them is a “racist”.
The Epic Of Gilgamesh
Of all these flood stories, there is one that is of particular interest to anyone who would study both the global flood record and the record of the biblical character called Nimrod in Genesis 10. This is an ancient Sumerian record found on a series of stone tablets, written in cuneiform, most commonly known as The Epic of Gilgamesh, though some have labeled it The Babylonian Nimrod Epic. What we will now examine is several key statements made in this record that seem to parallel with what we know about Nimrod from The Bible and other historical records that we have already reviewed.
I will be referring primarily to the translation of The Epic of Gilgamesh done by N.K. Sandars, a commonly used version of the story. However, I want to point out an early line in the story as it is rendered from the translation done by Andrew George in the book The Epic Of Gilgamesh: A New Translation, where it says: King Gilgamesh tyrannizes the people of Uruk, who complain to the gods. In Sandars translation this same line is rendered: GILGAMESH went abroad in the world, but he met with none who could withstand his arms till he came to Uruk.
Here we already see from the very beginning of this document that this Gilgamesh is a tyrant warrior, very similar to the man called Nimrod in The Bible. We also see that this Gilgamesh is associated with a land called Uruk, which practically all historians and theologians who work with this document say is the same place The Bible calls Erech—one of the cities started by Nimrod, which we will look at in a moment. Let’s continue with several other statements we find in this ancient Babylonian record, from the translation by Sandars.
A goddess made him, strong as a savage bull, none can withstand his arms. No son is left with his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all; and is this the king, the shepherd of his people? His lust leaves no virgin to her lover, neither the warrior’s daughter nor the wife of the noble.
Here we find a further confirmation that this Gilgamesh appears to have been an unruly man. The reference to no son being left with his father is unclear, but it could be a reference to slave labor that was used in the building of the cities and the ziggurat towers we read about in Genesis 10 and 11. This could mean that in addition to everything else Nimrod was the inventor of slave labor as well. Historians propose that slavery traces back to 6800 B.C. in Mesopotamia. Though this date would not be accepted on a biblical timeline, the date is not so much of importance as the fact that the earliest records of slavery are found in the land and cities established by Nimrod. In his book Understanding Global Slavery: A Reader Kevin Bales notes: “Sumerian drawings in clay that survive from 4000 B.C. show captives taken in battle being tied, whipped, and forced to work.” This date would fit the biblical timeline of Nimrod and Sumeria is a clear reference to the land where he established his cities.
When we move into a segment of the story titled The Forest Journey we find that Gilgamesh went on a journey to seek out the Babylonian god Humbaba (also called Huwawa). In this segment it is stated: “for in the forest lives Humbaba whose name is ‘Hugeness’.” According to numerous scholars it is believed that this is a [Babylonian/Sumerian] reference to, or perversion of, the name of Yahweh the Hebrew God. This is easily seen with the alternate name of Huwawa used interchangeably with Humbaba.
Apparently this Humbaba was viewed as a supreme deity, the story saying of this god: “We have heard that Humbaba is not like men who die, his weapons are such that none can stand against them; the forest stretches for ten thousand leagues in every direction; who would willingly go down to explore its depths? As for Humbaba, when he roars it is like the torrent of the storm, his breath is like fire and his jaws are death itself. Why do you crave to do this thing, Gilgamesh? It is no equal struggle when one fights with Humbaba,” As the story goes on, Gilgamesh would hunt down this Humbaba and ultimately slay him, Gilgamesh saying: “This Humbaba must die. Kill Humbaba first and his servants after.”
It is worth noting at this point that if this man was seeking to kill Humbaba, which is probably Yahweh, and then wipe out His servants this could be the first anti-Semitic attempt to wipe out Hebrew peoples, and at that before the Abrahamic covenant was even established. This same spirit rose up with the Pharaoh in Exodus, Haman in the Book of Esther, the Crusades, the Nazis under Adolf Hitler, the tyrant dictator Saddam Hussein, and radical Islamic Jihadists like Osama bin Laden. It may not mesh well with some people’s theological agendas, but all indications are that this Gilgamesh is the earliest known man to possess this spirit and that he is one and the same as the biblical Nimrod, who is said to be the first tyrant warrior on the earth. He was the first Pharaoh, Haman, Hitler, Hussein, and bin Laden.
This is further supported by the mission of Gilgamesh to hunt down Humbaba and slay him. In the biblical text it is often rendered that Nimrod was a “mighty hunter before the Lord”. But considering points about the Hebrew language used by experts like Benner and in comparison to the story of Gilgamesh, it becomes more likely that the Genesis text is talking about a man who resisted Yahweh to His face, hunted Him down, and slayed Him—symbolically, of course, to establish his Babylonian religion—and started the first “God is dead” movement. Some people might need Nimrod to be a “good guy”, at least prior to Genesis 10:10, for their theological slant to work, but the history just does not support this.
To further build on this point, we can look at Exodus 20:3. In most Bibles this verse is rendered: You shall have no other gods before Me. But in The Scriptures (2009), published by the Institute For Scripture Research, this short statement reads: You have no other mighty ones against My face. That caught my attention as it seems similar to what I have shown to this point regarding Nimrod as described in Genesis 10.
As I looked into this I found that Exodus 20:3 shares two key words with Genesis 10:9. The first is al (עַל), Strong’s Concordance 5921, and means “upon, above, over”. It is also translated as “before” and “against”, among other possibilities. The second word in both passages is panim/paneh (פָנִים), Strong’s 6440, that means “face, faces”. Thus the statement of being defiant against the face of God is equally seen both in reference to Nimrod in Genesis 10 and in the commandment to not have any other gods before Yahweh in Exodus 20. This really solidifies a connection between Nimrod and the establishment of God-defying idolatry in God’s face.
Let me sidetrack for just a moment and address something else before moving on. I have been told, as I have already alluded to, that the interpretation of Nimrod I am presenting here comes from “white supremacists”. This is pretty absurd when you factor in things like the Gilgamesh Epic and records from Josephus and the Talmud. What is referred to as “White Supremacy” is a view that originates from something called scientific racism that originated in the 1600s. This is where the idea that darker-skinned peoples are more closely related to apes, like chimpanzees, than lighter-skinned peoples are.
When pointing out that the history traces to the Babylonian Talmud and Josephus, I have been told that this is all from Roman influence and the Romans were “white supremacists”. Maybe they were lighter-skinned peoples that racially driven people would classify as racially “white”, but they were not supremacists. The Romans, in ruling their people, allowed those people to keep their cultural and religious identities. Supremacists seek to eliminate these identities, the reason why Nazi Germans were slaughtering anyone not of the “Aryan race”. Besides that, even if the Romans in any way influenced the Talmud and Josephus, they certainly didn’t have anything to do with The Epic of Gilgamesh.
The reality is that “supremacists” noticed that the actual history surrounding this character Nimrod fit their own agenda and so they capitalized on it. After all, you can’t say someone created history when that history is documented long before they exist. And when the only response I get from some people is “white people wrote that” or “white people said that”, I know they really don’t value historical facts in conflict with a “God showed me in The Bible” theology that simply does not line up with the facts. Racist views that mirror the teachings of radical cult groups like the Black Hebrew Israelites are something I will not embrace or endorse, especially when the only historical sources that support them come from the demonic Jewish mysticism—a deviation from any biblical form of Judaism—that started in the Middle Ages, around the same time as scientific racism and “white supremacy” began. People who would write off solid history as “white supremacist” before such a thing existed simply because it ruins their theology are typically engaged in a form of racism that is totally unacceptable for a follower of Yeshua. In The Bible and in actual biological fact there is no such a thing as “races” anyway, every human on the planet is a shade of the color brown. There is no such a thing as “black people”, “white people”, or “red people” and “yellow people”. We’re all human, we’re all the same, we’re all equal.
In the next segment of The Epic, titled Ishtar And Gilgamesh, And The Death Of Enkidu, we find a poem written documenting what Gilgamesh said to the counselors of Uruk. In this we find a line that says: “The mountain we climbed where we slew the Watchman.” This appears to be his declaration that he successfully killed Humbaba. While not the focus of this message, in other writings I have noted how The Mountain of God is biblically the foundation of God’s order in Creation. We see the mountain in Eden, Ararat, Horeb, Sinai, Zion, and in Revelation 21:10 we find the Spirit leading John in the vision back to God’s Holy Mountain to view the new Jerusalem coming down. The mountain that represents the plan of God’s Creation is contrasted with the tower of the cities of men that stands in conflict with and in defiance toward God’s ways.
The fifth segment of The Epic is titled The Story Of The Flood. This is where we really see how this ancient record is so closely related to the biblical account that this Gilgamesh is certainly the same person The Bible calls Nimrod. Let’s take a look at some statements from this segment:
‘You know the city Shurrupak, it stands on the banks of Euphrates? That city grew old and the gods that were in it were old. There was Anu,-lord of the firmament, their father, and warrior Enlil their counsellor, Ninurta the helper, and Ennugi watcher over canals; and with them also was Ea. In those days the world teemed, the people multiplied, the world bellowed like a wild bull, and the great god was aroused by the clamour. Enlil heard the clamour and he said to the gods in council, “The uproar of mankind is intolerable and sleep is no longer possible by reason of the babel.” So the gods agreed to exterminate mankind.
Tear down your house, I say, and build a boat. These are the measurements of the barque as you shall build her: let hex beam equal her length, let her deck be roofed like the vault that covers the abyss; then take up into the boat the seed of all living creatures.”
When the seventh day dawned the storm from the south subsided, the sea grew calm, the, flood was stilled; I looked at the face of the world and there was silence, all mankind was turned to clay. The surface of the sea stretched as flat as a roof-top; I opened a hatch and the light fell on my face. Then I bowed low, I sat down and I wept, the tears streamed down my face, for on every side was the waste of water. I looked for land in vain, but fourteen leagues distant there appeared a mountain, and there the boat grounded; on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast, she held fast and did not budge. One day she held, and -a second day on the mountain of Nisir she held fast and did not budge. A third day, and a fourth day she held fast on the mountain and did not budge; a fifth day and a sixth day she held fast on the mountain. When the seventh day dawned I loosed a dove and let her go. She flew away, but finding no resting-place she returned. Then I loosed a swallow, and she flew away but finding no resting-place she returned. I loosed a raven, she saw that the waters had retreated, she ate, she flew around, she cawed, and she did not come back. Then I threw everything open to the four winds, I made a sacrifice and poured out a libation on the mountain top.
This records the story of the flood being told to Gilgamesh by a man the story identifies as Utnapishtim, who clearly parallels the biblical character of Noah. After all, this story is practically identical to the biblical flood record.
I encourage you to take the time to read through the entire narrative of The Epic of Gilgamesh. It is a fascinating read, particularly when you factor in the biblical parallels and how this story offers insights into the narrative of Genesis. Looking at validated historical works connected with biblical accounts is essential to understanding what The Bible is really saying and overcoming the errors of modern Christian thought which is so often based on what people read into the text through eisegesis and then try to claim that “God showed them” something in Scripture that doesn’t match up with actual verifiable history, which is a fast track to heretical teachings.
Nimrod And The Nephilim
There is no shortage of wild theories regarding who (or what, for that matter), “The Nephilim” referred to in Genesis 6 were. So first I want to say that I am not seeking to add to these wild theories, particularly prominent in Internet groups who identify as Hebrew Roots. Also, I want to point out that the way this verse reads does not necessarily mean that these Nephilim are the same as the “sons of God” mentioned in the same verse. I have, for example, contemplated in my studies the possibility that these are two different things and that the Nephilim, referring to “giants”, is simply a reference to dinosaurs. After all, it seems that their mention is possibly nothing more than a timestamp on the passage. Of course, minimizing who or what these Nephilim were certainly will not sit well with some people, especially those who engage in radical and highly sensational theories about them.
What we do know is that the people mentioned in Genesis 6:4, the “sons of God”, were apparently wicked as the next verse says, “Then Adonai saw that the wickedness of humankind was great on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of their heart was only evil all the time.” This brings us to an interesting place, because we see in this passage the same Hebrew word we have already looked at: “gibbor”.
Regarding this passage in Genesis 6 and our subject passage of Genesis 10:8-12, Matthew Henry says this in his commentary that is highly regarded in many Christian circles: “Nimrod was resolved to lord it over his neighbours. The spirit of the giants before the flood, who became mighty men, and men of renown, Ge 6:4, revived in him.”
Some theories of Nimrod are that he was himself a giant. I do not want to get too much into theories, again, we have enough of those regarding “The Nephilim”. But I do find it interesting that Henry uses the term “giants” in his remarks.
As noted, the Hebrew “gibbor” is used here in Genesis 6:4 just as it is used in reference to Nimrod. In this case it is written as הַגִּבֹּרִ֛ים. In this form it too is missing the character “וֹ”, indicating that while a longer word it too has the base used in reference to Nimrod. This is something very much worth considering as we move toward looking at the cities this man established, as it is reasonable to conclude that Henry may have been onto something in connecting the same spirit mentioned in Genesis 6:4 with the actions of this Nimrod.
Let me also note that while any content that would connect Nimrod with embracing the spirit of Genesis 6:4-5 is really a reference to the people called “the sons of God”, regardless of whether or not these people were one and the same as whoever or whatever is called “The Nephilim”. Looking at Genesis 6:5 again, we see language that may suggest these people were united in their effort to defy God. Compare this with Genesis 11:1-9, which I will examine in more detail later, where we see the people once again working in unity to defy God through the building of the ziggurat towers.
Nimrod’s Cities And The Babylonian System
This is the system of corporations, banks, governments, and even churches. It seems no great feat to show a Christian how most people “at the top” of man-made systems are the modern manifestations of the spirit embraced by Nimrod, but what about churches and pastors? The system that is the corporate church is simply not biblical. It is the result of applying the Babylonian System to building personal empires where preachers can capitalize on their parishioners. It was born out of the “New Roman Religion” of Constantine, not the movement of the Apostles. And the religion of Rome, as with all pagan religions, has it’s roots in the Babylonian religion of Nimrod—the first known pagan religion to develop after the flood. Sadly, this is the system that almost every Christian church in America and much of the world influenced by American Christianity operates under, and it’s simply not biblical.
Genesis is the Book of Beginnings. In Genesis 10 and 11 we find, among other things, the beginnings of the Babylonian System of the cities of men started by a man whose name literally identifies him as the man who rebelled against Yahweh, defying Him to His face and starting the original “God is dead” movement. Now we will examine the cities started by this Nimrod and a pattern we can find in them.
The beginning of his kingdom included Babel, Erech, Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. From that land he went out to Assyria and built Nineveh, Rechovot-ir, Calah and Resen, between Nineveh and Calah—it is the great city. ~Genesis 10:10-12 (TLV)
Each of the cities mentioned in this passage were given a name that has a specific meaning. It is common practice to use names that have some type of meaning or to name someone or something after someone or something familiar. We see the latter, for example, with the naming of the post-flood men Cush and Havilah, named for Edenic lands lost from the effects of the flood, which completely changed the landscape of the earth. These men would eventually name lands with their own name, most prominent with Cush whose name became associated with the northeast portion of Africa where today the nations of Ethiopia, Sudan, and Somolia are. In the case of the naming of the cities built by Nimrod, it seems these names were given based on what they mean. Let’s examine the names of these cities.
Babel: mixing, confusion
Erech: lengthen, prolong, live with
Accad: subtle
Calneh: Fortress of Anu
Assyria: step, going
Nineveh: place of fish
Rechovot-ir: wide paths or streets
Calah: firm, rugged strength
Resen: a halter, jaw, bridle
Let’s put all of this together: Nimrod started his system—The Babylonian System—through confusion, then he subtly offered people prolonged life and length of days. From there he established worship of Anu as the primary deity (this is important, you will see why in a moment). From there we see the establishing of steps or going up, perhaps dealing with the creation of what we today call “climbing the corporate ladder”. After that we see Nineveh established high upriver on the Tigris, certainly named as a place where fish were caught and marketed, establishing a system where people had to rely on “markets” for their food, as they could no longer raise their own food because they were bound to supporting the city system.
Then we have wide paths or streets—that seems familiar: The gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many (Matthew 7:13). Then we see the final part of this system: ruling with firm and rugged strength through a bridle put on the people. For this, we turn to James 3:3 that says: “And if we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we guide their whole body as well.”
Nimrod first established his kingdom by declaring Yahweh dead, caused the people to become confused, led them to worship Anu, set them on the broad path that leads to death and destruction, and became the sole authority that controlled people—the first tyrant warrior dictator king in the earth. The system of the cities of men is so plainly laid out in the record of this man Nimrod, but it gets lost in modern translations of Scripture.
So who is this Anu? In Sandar’s rendition of The Epic of Gilgamesh we find in the prologue: “In Uruk he built walls, a great rampart, and the temple of blessed Eanna for the god of the firmament Anu, and for Ishtar the goddess of love.” Anu is the god of the firmament. Think about that! Historically in Judeo-Christian belief SATAN is the god of the firmament. The cities of men started by Nimrod were the finalizing of the work the serpent started in the garden when humanity was led to question the commandment of God and eat something God said not to eat—the same way most Christians continue to do today when they completely disregard the food laws of Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14.
At the end of The Epic there is a list of offerings given to various Babylonian gods, and one statement says: “bread for Ningizzida the god of the serpent, the lord of the Tree of Life.” The serpent, the Tree of Life—This shows that what Nimrod/Gilgamesh initiated was a total submission to Satan, the serpent from Eden, associating him with the Tree of Life. They submitted to Anu and declared him, Satan, to be the way to the Tree of Life. Satan’s kingdom is built on the cities of men, standing in opposition and defiance to Yahweh’s Holy Mountain. I’ll also remind you that earlier I discussed the relationship between the Hebrew “Ani” and the insertion of the “nun” to make the “Ni” sound in Nimrod (Ni-Marad, The Rebel). There is also a relationship between Ani and Anu. Does this sound familiar?
How you have fallen from heaven, O brighstar, son of the dawn! How you are cut down to the earth, you who made the nations prostrate! You said in your heart: “I will ascend to heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. I will sit upon the mount of meeting, in the uttermost parts of the north. I will ascend above the high places of the clouds— I will make myself like Elyon.” ~Isaiah 14:12-14 (TLV)
As I have already noted in discussing the relationship between the application of “nun” to “marad” and the Hebrew word “ani” may indicate that prior to Nimrod being a formal title of “The Rebel” it may have first been a declaration by the man himself, whose real name is perhaps Gilgamesh, boldly proclaiming: I will rebel. After all, the pattern we described here in Isaiah seems strikingly similar to the pattern of self-established authority seen in the names of the cities established by Nimrod.
I want to also remind you, as stated earlier in this message, that Nimrod’s initiative was first a movement toward the east, which is always connected with movement away from God. This pattern is first seen in Eden after the fall where man was driven out of Eden toward the east, and it seems to follow throughout Scripture. In contrast, we see the pattern of the Gospel historically moving toward the west. The “Good News” of Yeshua started in Jerusalem, spread west into Rome and Greece, continued into Europe and Africa, made its way to the Americas, and to this day the Asian regions remain among the least evangelized by Christianity, though that appears to be changing. Nimrod, being a son of Cush, would have moved out of the land settled by his ancestors, the land known today as Africa, and established his Kingdom to the east, even beyond the land of Canaan that would become the land of Israel—the other end of the least evangelized region of the world (generally referred to by evangelism scholars as the 10/40 Window). Think about that, the region of the world that has been the most difficult to reach with the Gospel of Yeshua is the region that continues east out of Nimrod’s land.
Artificial Eden
Then they said, “Come! Let’s build ourselves a city, with a tower whose top reaches into heaven. So let’s make a name for ourselves, or else we will be scattered over the face of the whole land.”
Then Adonai came down to see the city and the tower that the sons of man had built. Adonai said, “Look, the people are one and all of them have the same language. So this is what they have begun to do. Now, nothing they plan to do will be impossible. Come! Let Us go down and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand each other’s language.”
So Adonai scattered them from there over the face of the entire land, and they stopped building the city. This is why it is named Babel, because Adonai confused the languages of the entire world there, and from there Adonai scattered them over the face of the entire world. ~Genesis 11:1-9 (TLV)
Like so many other things in Scripture, this passage is so often misrepresented by the modern “preacher”. I don’t know how many times I have heard the Tower of Babel presented as a tower that would literally reach to “heaven”, which of course would be physically impossible. But that doesn’t stop these people who feel the need to exaggerate the text for whatever reason.
The reality is that what is described here is a type of ancient structure known as the ziggurat. There is also a mention of a ziggurat tower in the Gilgamesh Epic, where it is stated of the subject city of that text, Uruk (aka Erech), “examine well the brickwork; see if it is not of burnt bricks.” Those ziggurats of which there are still remains are made in this exact manner as described both in Genesis and Gilgamesh, using baked bricks sealed with bitumen.
Something else that is interesting is that there is no ziggurat tower today that is complete in its finished form. Secular historians will say that they were destroyed and eroded over time, but I think there is another possible explanation for this. Apart from documents, there is no actual physical evidence that any of these towers, including the one in Babylon, actually was completed. The Bible does tell us that God divided the people and the Tower of Babel was abandoned unfinished. However, this does not necessarily mean it was not later completed by those who remained in Babylon. But it is interesting that none are complete today and The Bible says they were abandoned unfinished.
The word ziggurat means “mountain”, as these towers were designed to replicate natural mountains. I have already mentioned how important actual mountains are in the Kingdom of God. Eden was a mountain that fed God’s Garden with water. Ararat was the mountain where the ark landed and life was restarted. Sinai was the mountain where God gave His Torah to Moses. Calvary was the mountain where our Messiah was crucified.
These towers were both the center of pagan worship and also the source of supply for the city people. One of these ziggurats, Chogha Zanbil, still has the remains of a very advanced water filtration and purification system. This was the design of the city and the tower, where men rose to power and became the real gods of the people. Having abandoned the one true God, Yahweh, they created gods that were used to control the masses, but the rulers were the real gods of the people. Making their own mountain, their own gods, and controlling resources, men rose to power and became the oppressors of their communities. Babylon and Nimrod were the origins of corrupt government, oppression and slavery, and the false construct of “races” that developed into “racism” where men became divided against each other instead of standing against the true corruption of tyrants like Nimrod throughout history.
The ziggurats were built throughout the land of Nimrod, the region of Mesopotamia often historically called the fertile crescent. Two rivers flow through this region that were named the Tigris and Euphrates, both names recycled from two of the Edenic rivers mentioned in Genesis 2. The city of Assyria was set along the Tigris so the river would flow east from it, just as the original Tigris from Genesis 2 did.
Nimrod’s cities were not just an establishment of the Babylonian system of the cities of men through confusion and control of the people. What this man did was to create a fake Eden. He recreated God’s Garden. In fact, one of the established Seven Wonders of the World is the famous Hanging Gardens of Babylon that would be made many generations later, according to some sources by Nebuchadnezzar II.
Nimrod was not merely the first warrior king in the earth, he was the first to start a movement to declare Yahweh dead and establish himself as a god. The Gilgamesh Epic supports this as the “hero” in the myth is part man and part god. History indicates that Nimrod was seemingly deified after he died, which makes sense when we look at ancient peoples. This was also the practice of the Egyptians, to deify their Pharaohs after their passing—Egypt being where we first find the people divided at Babel to be formally classified into “races”.
So many ancient cultures around the world built pyramid-like towers as the centerpieces of their cities and their worship. The system of the city continues to this day, still with rising towers as the centerpieces of man-made innovations, humanist religions, and governments that rule the people. The methods might be a little different, but the corrupt governments of the world continue to oppress people and incite “race wars” to keep the “common folk” fighting against each other, allowing those in power to stay in power. This all started with Nimrod, the man whose name declares him as The Rebel, the one who declared God dead and himself the god of the people. To end, I will quote Evan Eisenberg once again, as it may hold more meaning to you now: No place is godforsaken, unless it be the cities of men. This may be because the cities of men are the foundation of men forsaking God.
~Blessings and Shalom~
©2020 Truth Ignited Ministry
