101 Myths of the Bible: how ancient scribes - Conscious Evolution TV

100 101 Myths of the Bible
used with a nation it signifies the people of the nation. The difference, therefore,
between Lud and Ludim is akin to the difference between Egypt and Egyptians.
A similar duplication also occurs with the coupling of Dedan, grandson of Cush,
and Dodanim, a son of Javan in the Japheth list. Biblical Hebrew had no vowels, so the
written word Dedan would appear as Ddn and Dodanim would appear as Ddnm, the
plural form of Ddn.
The presence of so many duplicates in the genealogy indicates the artificial nature
of the catalogue. But other evidence also points to a late composition.
Perhaps the oddest aspect of the Table of Nations concerns the treatment of
Assyria and Babylonia. Nowhere do we find Babylon, a major power, identified as a
descendant of Noah. On the other hand, Assyria appears as a son of Shem (by the
name Asshur). According to the story, Nimrod, a son of Cush (i.e., Ethiopia), conquered
four cities,“Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar”
(Gen. 10:10). These four cities belong within the realm of Babylon, but nowhere in
the Table of Nations do we find these four cities identified with the sons of Noah.
However, the story says that Asshur (i.e., Assyria) came out of the land of Shinar and
founded the main cities of Assyria.
The text is ambiguous about whether Assyria controlled Babylon or Babylon controlled
Assyria. Neither scenario properly depicts the relationship between these two
countries for almost a thousand years after the time of the flood. Not until the thirteenth
century B.C. did Assyria become the first of the two nations to control the
other. In the seventh century B.C., a Babylonian alliance conquered Assyria. The biblical
description is simply garbled history that gets many of the facts all wrong.
Several other nations mentioned in the rosters, such as Madai (the Medes), Javan
(the Ionians), and Tartessos, didn’t emerge as political powers until the first millennium
B.C., indicating that the compilation occurred sometime during the first millennium.
The above instances of duplication, historical inaccuracy, and chronological impossibility
cover only some of the errors contained within the Table of Nations and shows
that Noah’s genealogy was composed during the first millennium B.C. based on existing
geopolitical divisions and mythic traditions.