Prophet Elijah as Greek Myrtilus



Taken from:


Pelops, Ahab and the Achaeans

by John R. Salverda


Elijah as Myrtilus

Myrtilus (a name suspiciously like another Hittite name of the same era, ‘Mursilis’ TISHBITE in Hebrew “Tishbi” implying from the settlement of Teshub. There is a play-on-words here. Tishbi uses the same letters that spell “Tashuv” i.e. return or repent. Elijah exhorted the Israelites to repent. Coincidently, “Teshub” was also the name of the chief god of the Hittites.) also was murdered, and in his case it was said to be accusations, that were lodged against him by Hippodameia, thus manipulating Pelops into committing the crime. This is the method employed by the Biblical Ahab and Jezebel against Naboth, but Jezebel brought accusations against, and called for the death of, someone else as well, one who was a bit more like the Greek Myrtilus, the great prophet Elijah. The greatness of Elijah, as portrayed in the Jewish literature, is not reflected in the mythological figure of Myrtilus, but the myth is a biased version of the Scriptural story, as told presumably, by the sons and followers of Ahab whom, we would not expect to honor Elijah. Even so, the sons of Pelops had to admit that the ‘traitor’ Myrtilus, did have some very Elijah-like attributes. The curse, for instance, that Myrtilus proclaimed against the house of Pelops, turned out to be a true prophecy. Myrtilus was acknowledged as a prophet, he was said to be one of ‘the sons of Hermes,’ (Hermes, the serpent stick carrying messenger of god, has elsewhere been identified as the Greek version of Moses, who in turn was sometimes referred to as ‘Nebo,’ meaning the ‘prophet.’ ) Similarly Elijah, as many believe, is supposed to have belonged to an organization that was called, ‘the sons of the prophets,’ (2KI 4:1.) .

‘And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king’s sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.’ (2KI 10:8) The Scriptural story about the ‘heads’ is almost certainly true, and it must have had a lasting traumatic effect on the psyche of those followers of Ahab who fled to Greece and told the tale of Pelops, for this morbid display is attested to in the Greek myths as well. Oenomaus, the myth relates, cut off the heads of those who dared to contest him in the chariot chase and lost. These heads he exhibited on the gate of his palace and the story specifically mentions the regret felt by Pelops upon seeing the ‘faces’ on display. (According to Hyginus, Fab. 84, when Pelops saw the heads of the unsuccessful suitors nailed over the door, he started to regret his impudence. He therefore appealed to Myrtilus, the charioteer of Oenomaus, promising half of the kingdom if he would change his affiliation and collaborate with him.) Ahab’s corresponding regret, (appealing to Elijah, just as Pelops had appealed to Myrtilus) famously portrayed in the Scriptures (1 Kings 21:17-29) as an act of true repentance, resulted in a postponement of reckoning for his sin which would be imposed instead upon his sons, the same sons whose heads made up the grisly exhibition here referred to. It could be argued that Ahab himself did not actually ‘see’ the heads, however this argument could be refuted by saying that Ahab was afforded a ‘vision’ of the retribution visited upon his sons through the Prophet (‘seer’) Elijah.

In the Scriptures, the heads were also displayed because of a lost chariot chase, in this case it was Jehu (anointed by Elijah 1Kings 19:15,16) who furiously drove his chariot on behalf of the Almighty to work out His revenge for the death of Naboth. Jehu overtook his opponent’s chariot piercing him through the heart and that is why the heads were on display. These heads were indeed the heads of the other suitors for the throne, the sons of Ahab. The Biblical quote runs thusly; ” And Jehoram king of Israel and Ahaziah king of Judah went out, each in his chariot, and they went out against Jehu, and met him in the portion of Naboth the Jezreelite. … And Jehu drew a bow with his full strength, and smote Jehoram between his arms, and the arrow went out at his heart, and he sunk down in his chariot. Then said Jehu ‘ Take up, and cast him in the portion of the field of Naboth the Jezreelite: for ‘ Surely I have seen yesterday the blood of Naboth, and the blood of his sons, saith THE ALMIGHTY; and I will requite thee in this plat, saith THE ALMIGHTY. Now therefore take and cast him into the plat of ground, according to the word of THE ALMIGHTY. But when Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this, he fled … And Jehu followed after him, and said, Smite him also in the chariot.’ (II Kings 9:21-28) The chariot killing of Ahaziah the king of Judah and grandson of Ahab even more closely parallels the killing of the suitors by Oenomaus because, although it is difficult to piece together the different accounts, (compare 2 Chron. 22 :7-9), it is apparent that Ahaziah fled and was captured by the men of Jehu, then Jehu ordered Ahaziah to be placed in his chariot so that he could be killed in it, then he was granted a head start. Ahaziah was mortally wounded as he fled to Megiddo, where he died of his wounds, he was buried in Jerusalem. So it was a kind of chase, as in the Greek myth.

Obviously the men of Ahab (the Achaeans) held Elijah (Myrtilus) in low esteem, considering him to be a traitor. However Ahab, as was true of all Hittite rulers,(in accordance with a known Hittite document restricting the absolute power of Hittite kings, called the “Edict of Telipinus”) did not have absolute power (Jezebel, the daughter of a different kind of King, did not seem to understand this.). He was required to justify his decisions to the royal clan (comprised of princes, royal cousins, the priesthood, elders of the state, and others of prestige). Elijah was highly respected and Ahab could not hate him openly. When Elijah admonished Ahab, the King had to clearly and visibly display his repentance, not just out of fear of the curse but also in order to maintain the loyalty of the clan. Pelops as well is said to have regretted his treatment of Myrtilus, and after the death of the seer, Pelops is said to have introduced and enforced the worship of Hermes (the Greek Moses), the supposed father of Myrtilus, among the Achaeans. Pelops built a few shrines to Hermes, and even instituted some of the rites and rituals that were advocated by Hermes, such as maintaining an ark which contained the fleece of the sacrificed golden lamb (indicating the lamb of god no doubt) the purpose of which was to justify the Pelopid dynasty (an obvious parallel to the Mosaic Ark of the Covenant, containing the Messianic promise and justifying the Davidic dynasty). And in fact, there was a more honorable opinion of Myrtilus that was known to the ancient Greeks. Pindar, and other early writers, say that it was Poseidon’s gift of the flying chariot that won the race for Pelops, not the treachery of the seer Myrtilus. Pindar describes how god bestowed on Pelops a chariot with winged steeds. ‘Honoring him, the god gave him a golden chariot, and horses with untiring wings. He overcame the might of Oenomaus, and took the girl as his bride.’ (Pindar, Olympian 1. 85) On a chest at Olympia the horses of Pelops in the chariot race were represented with wings (Paus. 5.17.7). The earliest mention of Myrtilus’ treachery is to be found in the writings of Pherecydes in the 5th century BC. and, at any rate, Myrtilus was respected by many and was not unanimously despised even by the Achaeans (the men of Ahab).

It may be argued by some that Naboth was not like Oenomaus in that he is not associated with driving a chariot, and that his death did not involve a chariot race. True enough, for although the portion of the Scriptures that involves Ahab, is full of chariotry, and Ahab is portrayed as “contesting” with Naboth over his vineyard, the particular chapter of Naboth’s murder does not involve a chariot. However, that argument overlooks the fact that the foremost clash, and overarching theme outlined in that section of the Scriptures is the contest between the polytheism of Ahab against the Monotheism of Elijah and incidentally of Naboth, whom Elijah had sided with against Ahab. The climax of this clash was the contest at mount Carmel which culminated with a very famous chariot race between Ahab and Elijah (in which Elijah miraculously succeeded although on foot). A more careful reading of the Greek myth reveals that Oenomaus, the Greek Naboth was not the driver of his own chariot he was merely riding along, and that his chariot was actually driven by his charioteer Myrtilus, the Greek Elijah, ‘the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof.’ Notice that Elijah is referred to Scripturally as the “horseman of the chariot,” not just a rider in the chariot, but its’ horseman. Thus it is not unreasonable to conclude that Elijah was envisioned in his heavenly translation as not merely being picked up by it, but rather that he was ensconced in the heavenly chariot as it’s charioteer. “And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces.” (2 Kings 2:11,12) Oddly Josephus himself seems to doubt the story of the heavenly chariot, saying of Elijah only, that no one knows of his death, “Now at this time it was that Elijah disappeared from among men, and no one knows of his death to this very day; but he left behind him his disciple Elisha, as we have formerly declared. And indeed, as to Elijah, and as to Enoch, who was before the deluge, it is written in the sacred books that they disappeared, but so that nobody knew that they died.” (Antiquities, 9). At any rate it does seem reasonable for some to blame (or credit as the source my be) Jezebel, who called for his death and caused his exile, for his “disappearance.”

After the chariot/foot race from Mount Carmel of Ahab and Elijah, Jezebel called for the immediate death of Elijah. Elijah himself prayed for his own death at that time (never-the-less the Scriptures have Elijah out living Ahab). Likewise the death of the seer Myrtilus was called for by Hippodameia. In both cases the last day of the great prophet/seer was spent in a flying chariot supplied by God/god. However in the myth told by the Achaeans the flying chariot was supplied to Pelops and it was he who invited the seer to take a ride in it. As they were flying high in the heavens Pelops killed Myrtilus by Kicking him out.

The prophecies of Myrtilus continued to come true for generations after his earthly departure. Like Elijah, Myrtilus did not lose consciousness after death, he even, again like Elijah, came back occasionally to preside over the death of the cursed dynasty, especially royal chariot deaths, for as some say, that the ghost of Myrtilus was the ‘horse scarer’ in the Hippodrome at Olympia. Myrtilus, also like Elijah, was translated into heaven at his death, where he was placed in the heavenly chariot which is known to this very day as the constellation called, ‘Auriga,’ or as we say, ‘the charioteer.’ Here perhaps, the Greek myth has a more ‘logical’ explanation for the story of Elijah’s apotheosis and the fiery chariot of the Heavenly God.



25 thoughts on “Prophet Elijah as Greek Myrtilus

  1. Hermes is Cush. See the books “The Parthenon Code: Mankind’s History in Marble,” “Noah in Ancient Greek Art,” and the DVD “The Serpent’s Side of Eden.”

    1. Dear Bob

      Really appreciate your efforts to demonstrate Greek appropriation of biblical stories. Do not necessarily agree with all of it (e.g. Titan pushing heaven away, though it applies philosophically), but it is always most interesting and readable.

      John R. Salverda is a past master of this sort of work. You can find his articles at our:

      Anyway, I shall pass on your comments to John.
      God bless
      Damien Mackey.

      1. John R. Salverda wrote:

        Dear Damien (and Robert as well),

        I am well familiar with the concept of Hermes as Cush. In my youth, I followed the writings of Alexander Hyslop (“The Two Babylons” a virulently anti-Papist exposition), who had deduced that the name “Hermes” was a form of the name “Chemosh” (the god of the Moabites), and was therefore derived from “Chem” (“Ham”) and “Mose” (“delivered from,” or “son of”) thus “Ham’s son.” This supposition was further supported with a statement made by Hyginus; “Men for many centuries before lived without town or laws, speaking one tongue under the rule of Jove. But after Mercurius had explained the languages of men (whence he is called ermeneutes, ‘interpreter’, for Mercurius in Greek is called Ermes; he too, divided the nations), then discord arose among mortals, which was not pleasing to Jove.” (Hyginus, Fabulae 143). This coupled with the idea that Cush (Ham’s son) sounds like the name “Chaos” the Greek god of “confusion,” and Nimrod (often identified as the leader of the tower builders at Babel) likely had received his Babylonian kingdom as an inheritance from his father Cush (figured, under this theory, to have been the actual tower builder), made an impressive argument in favor of identifying Ham’s son, “Cush” with the Greek god “Hermes.”


        For the rest of John’s letter, go to:

      2. I read Hislop years ago also. I love underlining with colored pencils. After a time, I had just about every passage underlined.
        A study of Greek art has opened up much understanding. A key is the mother of Cush/Hermes, Naamah (Genesis 4:22) who came through the Flood as Ham’s wife, and inspired the post-flood rebellion led by her grandson Herakles/Nimrod. Most of those ancient goddesses (Ishtar, Asherah, Isis, Artemis, etc.) represent Naamah glorified and worshiped.
        Athena is the ultimate representation of Naamah as the one who brought the serpent’s “wisdom” through the Flood.
        Greek art celebrates the triumph of the way of Cain after the Flood.
        Zeus and Hera = Adam and Eve, Hephaistos and Ares, their two sons, are Cain and Seth. Nereus, a so-called minor sea god, is Noah. I have 37 images of Noah in ancient Greek art at plus a bunch of other great stuff.

      3. John

        There is no Scriptural evidence that the “Naamah” mentioned at Genesis 4:22 was the wife of Ham and the mother of Cush. I admit that her mention there, probably indicates that there was once some further, although unspecified, role for her, but I fear that it is one which has become lost to obscure antiquity. Probably her role had something to do with a more extended, lost story about Lamech and Tubal-cain, whom she is mentioned with and who may also have been, at one time, more illustrious. It had been suggested back in 1976 that the name “Tubal-cain” is the origin of the Roman name for Hephaestus, “Vulcan” (Henry M. Morris, “The Genesis Record” Page 146).


        For rest of this letter, go to:

      4. You may be mistaken. In their seminal work, “The Myth of the Goddess” which should be called “The Memory of the Adored Woman,” Baring and Cashford trace the many mid-eastern goddesses back to one: Nammu – pretty close to Naamah. They go into great detail in their connections with the exception of the Genesis connection. In the last part of “The Day Behemoth and Leviathan Died” David Allen Deal gives evidence for Naamah coming through the Flood, and I do as well in “Noah in Ancient Greek Art” and my DVD “The Serpent’s Side of Eden.”

      5. I wrote a long reply to John at the blogspot but lost it because I couldn’t figure out the profile bit. So then I wrote this, but saved it before it disappeared:
        Pardon me, John, you are correct that there is no Scriptural evidence for Naamah’s marriage to Ham. I must have read your post too hastily. I just wrote a long response and lost it because I can’t figure out the profile bit. The following brief summary puts Naamah into a context:

        NAS stands for National Academy of Sciences.

      6. OK Bob, I read your Chapter 9: “The Forbidden Theory of Ancient Greek Art” and while I can’t review the entire thing tonight I will do this much now and perhaps I shall pick apart the rest of it subsequently. From the sub-chapter entitled “ZEUS AND HERA ARE THE FIRST COUPLE DESCRIBED IN GENESIS” I have presented some quotes, with which I do take issue ….

        For rest of letter, go to:

      7. Dear Bob,

        In reviewing your next sub-chapter I can be a bit more conciliatory. You are almost certainly correct in your assertion that the Greek myths about the Garden of the Hesperides is a recollection of the Hebrew stories of the Garden of Eden. It is my conjecture that the Danaans of Argolis were of the Israelite tribe of Dan. These Danites had a priesthood who were directly descendant from Moses (the Priests of Micah’s Idol, Judges 18:30,31), and they would have been very familiar with the writings of their illustrious ancestor. There is, therefore, no need to resort to the idea that the heathen Greeks are harkening, as if through their own oral traditions, all the way back to their cultural memories, of these antediluvian events. At any rate, we can compare the two ancient gardens through the prism of your next sub-chapter, “THE GREEK VERSION OF EDEN.” ….

        For rest of letter, go to:

  2. You list seven couples who allegedly pre-date Zeus and Hera. These couples do not appear as part of Greek temple sculptures or on vase-paintings. Zeus and Hera each have a temple at Olympia, and they are the central couple on the east pediment of the Parthenon where the Athenians summarized their history and their boast of the triumph of the way of Kain after the Flood. You must learn to trust the artists, not the myths. Most myths are ancient misinterpretations of the art.
    For example, at, I present 37 images of Noah in ancient Greek art. I could present another 50. The Greeks called him Nereus (the wet one) and Halios Geron (the salt-sea old man). Mythologists call him “a minor sea god,” and yet he is pictured on ten times as many vases as Poseidon. Mythologists will also say that Deucalion and Pyrrha are Noah and his wife, but they appear nowhere in Greek art, while Nereus and Doris are all over the place, including on the Altar of Zeus at Pergamun, where they are forced to witness the triumph of the way of Kain over their God-fearing offspring. The memory of Deucalion and Pyrrha probably comes from the ferocious but localized flood caused by the explosion of Thera in 1500 BC. Trust the art and always keep in mind the overall theme – the Greek’s boasting of pushing Noah and his God out of the picture and exalting man as the measure of all things.

    You write of your intent to “pick apart” my work. I must say here, using the words of the apostle Paul, “Now to me it is the least trifle that I should be examined by you or by man’s day” (I Cor. 4:3).
    This leads to my spiritual outlook vs. yours. I am not part of apostate Christendom, but am part of the body of Christ. I believe the Scriptures in the original Hebrew and Greek are inspired by God, and that Paul is the Christ-commissioned apostle and teacher of the nations in knowledge and truth (Acts 26:18, I Timothy 2:7). BTW, Paul never uses any terms that could be translated as “trinity” “free will” or ‘Hell,” (the basis of apostate Christendom). I use the Concordant Literal Translation, an enormous help in getting past the creeds, dogma, and mistranslations of Christendom. Please see a brief summary of my book on this subject:

    I hope it is not true of you, but my experience is that most academics believe that they evolved from worms and reptiles by chance. If you do believe that, I hope you understand how difficult it will be for me to take seriously the views of someone who sees himself as a mutant randomite.

    Do you consider our Creator or your reasoning to be supreme?

  3. bob,

    I read a review of the new Russell Crowe movie ‘Noah’ (not yet released…) that the young daughter-in-law they have appearing in a prominent role in that film is depicted as Shem’s (vice Ham’s) wife….

    No word yet if she is depicted as coming from the side of Cain….

    supposed to premiere on March 28th….

    rsp, matt

    1. Dear Bob,

      Your initial claim was, if you will recall; “The Greek tradition insists that Zeus and Hera were the first couple” a claim that I was able to debunk easily by referring to my Hesiod (Theogony). I showed you that other couples preceded Zeus an Hera in the Greek Tradition. Then you changed your argument, contending that whether or not they appear in Greek Tradition; “These couples do not appear as part of Greek temple sculptures or on vase-paintings.” You must not be as familiar with Greek art as you claim to be, otherwise how could you make such a false statement. It didn’t take me five minutes on the internet, to find all these images of these same couples on vase paintings. Anyone who checks this can disprove you. How can I have faith in what you say? Here are some artists for you to trust:


      For rest of letter, go to:

  4. John, I should have written that these other pairs rarely appear on vases, and when they do, the message is unrelated to the central message of Greek art: the triumph of the way of Cain after the Flood and the exaltation of man as the measure of all things. Many of the “gods” you site are not ancestors at all but like Themis, Okeanos, Ouranus, and Gaia, mere personifications of natural or cultural forces.
    That the Athenians “chose a serpent woman . . . as their goddess of knowledge” is ludicrous. Who, specifically, did the choosing?
    The serpent at Athena’s side is the Genesis serpent. She is Naamah being adored as the woman who reestablished the way of Cain after the Flood, bringing back the serpent’s “enlightenment.” In the oldest Greek, Linear B, she is Athana, short for Athanatos, the deathless one, derived from her long life she had (several hundred years), being born before the Flood.
    Just as Christ is the image of the invisible God, so Athena is the image of the invisible god of this eon who blinds the minds of those who believe not (II Corinthians 4:4)
    Herakles is not Nimrod’s original name in Greek. Herakles means the glory of Hera, and it was never to her that he gave glory, but always to Athena/Naamah, his grandmother. His original name was Erechkles, which sounds identical to Herakles. Erech was one of the great cities established by Nimrod (Genesis 10:10). Thus his name is connected to the glory of his city.
    Nimrod is also know as Erechtheus (the placer of Erech) and Erechthonios as a child. Some of the most gorgeous ancient vase art depicts the re-consecration of the child, Nimrod, into the way of Cain. Earth itself, presents the child to Athena/Naamah. Also present were the child’s father, Hermes/Cush, Hephaistos/Cain, and often, the half-serpent, half-Zeus Kekrops who symbolizes a time frame – early on the development of Zeus-religion when the hero of the takeover, Nimrod/Erechkles, was still a child. The serpent had yet to be transfigured fully into a “messenger of light” (II Corinthians 11:14), but with Nimrod’s birth, it was well underway. Zeus means “light” or A/T Kerenyi “the actual moment of lighting up.”
    Greeks worshipped Zeus as a serpent. In TPC, I show three stone reliefs of the serpent, one being worshipped as “Zeus Meilichios” or Zeus the easily entreated one, another with men worshipping a serpent twice as tall as they, and a third with the inscription “Heracleides to the god” of which Jane Ellen Harrison writes “When and where the snake is simply ‘the god’ the fusion with Zeus is made easy.”
    The half-serpent, half-Zeus Kekrops only shows up on vases that have to do with the time period of the re-consecration of Nimrod/Erechkles into the line of Cain. On one small sculpted piece, Kekrops puts his finger in front of his mouth urging quiet or secrecy as Earth presents the child to Athena.
    When full-fledged Zeus religion becomes operative after the conquests of Erechkles, Zeus has become the ancient serpent transfigured fully into the likeness of Adam. Surely you know that the altar of Zeus at Pergamum is called “the throne of Satan” (Revelation 2:13) by Jesus Himself.
    Atlas is Lamech, Naamah’s father. As the last pre-flood head of the line of Cain, Lamech (figuratively) possessed the apples. There is a vase painting of Atlas/Lamech enthroned next to the serpent-entwined apple tree. Priceless! Over the entrance to the temple of Zeus at Olympia, Lamech is pictured giving the apples to Erechkles once he has been successful in pushing away the heavens and with them, the God of the heavens. Note that Naamah is in the scene helping Erechkles push the heavens away.
    You haven’t heard about this because it pertains to “the secret of lawlessness which is already operating” (II Thessalonians 2:7).

    1. Dear Bob,

      First you said; “The Greek tradition insists that Zeus and Hera were the first couple” so I cited Greek tradition and named several couples that predated them. Then you said; “These couples do not appear as part of Greek temple sculptures or on vase-paintings.” so I produced several vase-paintings upon which they do appear. Now you say that they; “rarely appear on vases” and you insist upon the caveat that they must relate to the message, “the triumph of the way of Cain after the Flood and the exaltation of man as the measure of all things” before you will consider them valid. But you made this “message” up, it is the essence of your theory, and not the “central message of Greek art” at all! There is no “central message” that Greek art relates to, such a message is perceived and promoted only by you.

      You wondered about me saying, “That the Athenians chose a serpent woman . . . as their goddess of knowledge” And you asked; “Who, specifically, did the choosing?” I’m glad you asked because it gives me the opportunity to relate the following Greek myth; According to Varro, the choice between worshiping Athena or Poseidon was put to the vote of the people of Attica. They were asked to pick which would be more beneficial to mankind, Athena’s olive tree or Poseidon’s fountain. In those days, women had an equal vote with men. The men all voted for the god, and all the women voted for the goddess, but since there was one more woman than there were men, Athena won the referendum. Angered, Poseidon sent a great flood. So terrible was his judgment that it was decided to deprive women of the vote and to forbid children to bear their mother’s names for the future. (Augustine, De civitate Dei xviii.9). … Furthermore the day on which the vote took place, the second day of the first Attic month of Boedromion, (on or near the modern August 20th) was henceforth omitted from the calendar. (Plut. De fraterno amore 11; Plut. Quaest. Conviv. ix.6.) Apparently it was a big deal transgression with lasting societal consequences to choose the goddess over the god, a type of Athenian “original sin” committed by the women of Athens (whether Pandora, Persephone, or Eve, it seems like a widespread consensus that the woman always gets the blame). Of course you can believe the myth or not, but at least you can see that I didn’t simply make the statement up.

      I have no doubt that Athena’s serpent is based upon the serpent of Eden (In fact, I suspect that the name “Athene” is a mere corruption of the place-name “Eden” and that “Zion” is just another form of that name. Could Jerusalem/Zion be the actual site of Eden?) She also was famous for her tree, and Eden, as the first human residence, reminds me of; “Athens, a town said to be the first established in the world.” (Hyginus, Fabulae 164). Her birth, out of a male with no mother would distinctly identify her as Eve herself, except for the fact that the Greeks insist that she was a virgin (like the daughter of Zion) and not the mother of anyone (or grandmother for that matter). I can find no ancient source what-so-ever that Athena was ever called “Athanatos” (Hermes was called “Athanatos Diaktoros,” Immortal Guide) perhaps you can point one out for me, but it is of no consequence Athanatos means, as you intimate, nothing more than “immortal” and all gods and goddesses are supposed to be immortal. A long life is still not immortality, and the name Athena likely had nothing to do with the word Athanatos. You might just as well say that Don is short for donate, it looks good, but there is no evidence that it is true.

      Greek myths do not say that Athena is the grandmother of Herakles, and the Scriptures don’t say that Naamah is the grandmother of Nimrod. Surely, you yourself can claim the credit for inventing the idea that Herakles is named after Erech (a city of Nimrod) for there is no source material that says so, and I can find nobody else who finds this to be true. This is all pure conjecture on your part, with not a shred of evidence to back it up.

      I have my own theory as to the basis of the myth of the twi-formed Erechtheus, that may be a bit too detailed and complicated to relate here, but suffice it for me to say the following; Nimrod may well have been a pretender to Messiahship (I do wish that the Scriptures had more to say about him) but as such, he is much like many kings, heroes, and supposed gods. Erechtheus is like Nimrod in that they both are pretenders to Messiahship, this, in my view, is why so many heroes all over the world resemble the Christ even before He had come. Prophets, like Moses told all about Him, the Israelites spread the word, and mythologies were formed accordingly. You cite Kerenyi to show that Zeus means “light” who do you cite to show that Erechtheus means “the placer of Erech” The ancient mythographers, of course, had a different take on the matter; “They named him Erichthonius, because eris in Greek means ‘strife’ and khthon means ‘earth.” (Hyginus, Fabulae 166).

      You have Kekrops as Nimrod/Erechkles, but I think that he more resembles the Athenian version of Moses. Cecrops led a colony out of Egypt, (see the Scholiast on Aristophanes Plutus 773). Diodorus tells us, “the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt, and they undertake to offer proofs of such a relationship” (Diodorus Siculus book 1 Chapter I.28.4). Similarly from Plato, as his ancestor Solon was told by the Priests of Egypt, “At the head of the Egyptian Delta, where the river Nile divides, there is a certain district which is called the district of Sais, and the great city of the district is also called Sais, and is the city from which Amasis the king was sprung. And the citizens have a deity who is their foundress: she is called in the Egyptian tongue Neith, which is asserted by them to be the same whom the Hellenes called Athena. Now, the citizens of this city are great lovers of the Athenians, and say that they are in some way related to them.” (Plato Critias). Just as in the story of Moses leading the twelve tribes to the promised land, so the Greek myth of Cecrops has him leading his people to the area of Athens and dividing the land into twelve districts. Strabo tells us that, “Cecrops first settled the multitude in twelve cities,” (Geography 9. 1. 18 – 20). Notice here not only the division into twelve but also Strabo’s reference to “the multitude” that Cecrops was accredited with settling at the colony of Athens. Another example of how Cecrops was like Moses, can be seen in the writings of Pausanias, who says, “For Cecrops was the first to name Zeus the Supreme god, and refused to sacrifice anything that had life in it, but burnt instead on the altar the national cakes which the Athenians still call pelanoi.” (Description of Greece 8. 2. 2-3). Thus even a kind of monotheism such as that which was advocated by Moses, who was the first to name Yahweh (Ex. 3:14), had its parallel in the Greek myth of Cecrops (however corrupt, he advocated Zeus as the “supreme god”). Notice also the bit about the “national cakes” in regards to Moses setting up the festival of the unfermented cakes. Just as Moses was the “legislator of the Jews” so the Greek myths tell us, that it was Cecrops who first gave the people of Athens their laws. Moses also wrote the universal founding story in the book of Genesis, and it is evident that the Athenians were well aware of it, because it is used liberally, in the foundation myths of Athens. Some even say that Cecrops invented writing, another allusion to Moses who is sometimes said to have invented the alphabet. It seems probable that colonists from Palestine (not necessarily Judeans) brought the stories of Moses to Athens long after the exodus, and even after Jerusalem had been established for a while. For it is not just the story about coming up out of the land of Egypt that they share. They also tell stories about the “Virgin” city of the olive, with a temple containing an Ark that had contents which were taboo to look upon.

      I know that something at Pergamum is referred to as “the throne of Satan” (I always thought that it had something to do with the temple of Dionysus because of the phrase “the doctrine of Balaam” in the following verse but I could be wrong.) but what evidence do you have that the reference was to the “Altar of Zeus?”

      I have already given my view on the basis for the character of Atlas, he is almost certainly based upon Adam, not Lamech. The Scriptures do not connect Lamech, in any way, with “the serpent-entwined apple tree”, only you associate them because it fits your preconceived notions. It is the Original Sin, the sin of Adam (presumably whom the Greeks knew as Atlas) that alienates the kingdom of Heaven from the earth, and thus the well known icon of Mount Atlas.

      You say that the reason why I “haven’t heard about this” (you are apparently referring to your theory concerning “the triumph of the way of Cain after the Flood”) is because, it pertains to “the secret of lawlessness which is already operating” (as you quote 2nd Thessalonians 2:7). But could it not also be, that the reason why I haven’t heard of this, is because it is a fiction that grew out of your own, very furtive, imagination? It isn’t just me who hasn’t heard of it, the same is true of anyone who hasn’t yet come across your unique speculations.

      Thank you Bob, for your patient consideration, I do realize that it must be difficult to carry on a discussion with someone who disagrees with some of your most basic beliefs. I am simply offering my own interpretation of the origins of Greek mythology, as a sounding board against yours. I don’t believe that what I say on the mater is carved in stone, nor is it the word of God. Likewise I trust that you are not under the delusion that your personal hypothesis is the result of some kind of divine dispensation. -John

    2. Dear Bob,

      First you said; “The Greek tradition insists that Zeus and Hera were the first couple” so I cited Greek tradition and named several couples that predated them. Then you said; “These couples do not appear as part of Greek temple sculptures or on vase-paintings.” so I produced several vase-paintings upon which they do appear. Now you say that they; “rarely appear on vases” and you insist upon the caveat that they must relate to the message, “the triumph of the way of Cain after the Flood and the exaltation of man as the measure of all things” before you will consider them valid. But you made this “message” up, it is the essence of your theory, and not the “central message of Greek art” at all! There is no “central message” that Greek art relates to, such a message is perceived and promoted only by you.

      For rest, see:

    3. JudgeFebruary 24, 2014 at 4:51 PM

      There are a lot of fair associations made by well-meaning researchers into the connection between myth and history. As a Christian myself, I am predisposed to believe Genesis. I am also struck by how, e.g., Greek myths may be rewriting Genesis but from the losers point of view, i.e., a revision of history put forward by the fallen angels and their supporters.

      But I am still confused what connection is more plausible: Zeus (thunderbolt)-Poseidon (trident)-Hades (scythe) is Lamech-??-?? is Lucifer-Beelzebub-Azazel. (This leaves out other popular devil/demon names: Samael, Asmodeus, Mephistopheles, in no particular order.) Another connection suggests: Kronus is Cain is Hephaestus (note this makes Seth Ares). Yet another matrix is this: Kronus-Zeus-Poseidon-Hades is Adam-Cain-Seth-Abel. It goes on and on.

      I really wish we could get these various researchers in a room to hash out the critical connections between fallen angels/nephilim of Genesis with the popular retellings by post-flood cultures like the Greek myths.

      1. If we begin with the assumption that Genesis and the rest of the Scriptures are the word of God, and thus historical truth, then Greek art will make sense. It will no longer need to be interpreted as “myth” as it must be by atheists and academics imprisoned by their false reasonings.
        Homer calls Zeus the “father of Gods and men” over and over. What does that make his wife, Hera, if not the the “mother of all”? Remember that thea means “placer.” Hera is the goddess (placer) of marriage and child birth because she is Eve, the first woman to be married and to bear children.
        Above, John says there are 8 or so other couples as some kind of challenge to my work. Zeus and Hera occupied the center of the east pediment of the Parthenon and had their own temples at Olympia. To mix them as equals into some group of couples is a form of blindness to reality.
        You want to understand Greek art? Follow the apples. To begin with, Zeus and Hera get them from a serpent-entwined apple tree in an ancient garden paradise. The next person who has them is Atlas/Lamech the last ruler of the line of Cain. Over the east entrance to the temple of Zeus at Olympia, he is pictured presenting them to Herakles (really Erechkles) who, with the help of Athena/Naamah, is pushing away the heavens, and with them, the God of the heavens. Having done that, he has earned the apples. But that’s not the end of it. On the temple of Hephaistos/Cain in Athens, Erechkles is pictured as giving them to his grandmother, Athena/Naamah, because she is the one who inspired the rebellion. The Greeks thus depicted the restoration of the line of Cain after the Flood in clear terms. That’s their boast!
        As to so-called fallen angels/nephilim in Genesis 6, you must have the concordant translation. Accurate translations means everything in these passages as it does in all the rest of Scripture.
        “. . . and taking are they for themselves wives of all whom they choose” (v. 2) refers to the men in the line of Seth taking women from the line of Cain. The Greeks depicted this on the south side of the Parthenon and on the west pediment of the temple of Zeus as Kentaurs (Seth-men) taking the Cain women. The Cain women maintained their idolatry and corrupted the families of the line of Seth leading to the Flood. I have a chapter on that in “The Parthenon Code” and some more detail in the DVD “The Serpent’s Side of Eden.”
        Ignoring the truth of the Scriptures, and exalting their vain reasonings, academics have concluded that they are descended from reptiles and worms through chance copying errors in their reproductive genes. They are too dull to even wonder where the copying originates. Having such an intellectually debased and spiritually degenerate view of their own origins, why should we expect them to have any real understanding of ancient art?
        We don’t get to the truth by reasoning, but by God’s revelation.
        I pray that every deluded member of academia will receive from our Creator “a spirit of wisdom and revelation (apo-kalupsis = uncovering) in the realization of God, the eyes of their heart having been enlightened . . .” (Ephesians 1:17). You may enjoy

      2. Dear Bob,

        There are a lot of people in this world who assume “that Genesis and the rest of the Scriptures are the word of God, and thus historical truth,” and yet they do not accept your, rather fanciful, interpretation of Greek art. It is your assumption of things that are not in the Scriptures with which I take issue. Furthermore, it is not I who says, “there are 8 or so other couples” in challenging the truth of your statement, “The Greek tradition insists that Zeus and Hera were the first couple” (“a form of blindness to reality” on your part?). I am merely pointing out what Hesiod wrote in his “Theogony” and many other ancient Greek sources affirm the same thing. And I don’t really deny that Zeus and Hera are somewhat like Adam and Eve. I would just like to see you prove it without resorting to subjective reinterpretations of artwork, or by twisting, and even misrepresenting, Greek mythology.


        Rest of letter can be read at:

      3. Dear Bob,

        I have been critical, and then a bit conciliatory, but now I will take a more commendatory stance toward your work. Your recognition of the association between the symbols of the Hesperides and the symbolisms that appear in the archetypal marriage of Adam and Eve shows remarkable insight on your part. However, I would like to suggest, that the scene portrayed in the myth of the marriage of Zeus and Hera, is less a recollection of the cosmogonic episode in the Book of Genesis, and more in anticipation of the apocalyptic “Marriage of the Lamb” that we see in the Book of Revelation.
        Rest of e-mail at:

  5. John, to be blunt, you are a classic bullshitter. Please stop trying to be so “intelligent” and “knowledgeable.” Do you think the words of Homer and Hesiod are on a par with those of the Creator of heaven and earth?

    “Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the discusser of this eon? Does not God make stupid the wisdom of this world?
    For since, in fact, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom knew not God, God delights, through the stupidity of the heralding, to save those who are believing, since, in fact, Jews signs are requesting, and Greeks wisdom are seeking, yet we are heralding Christ crucified, to Jews, indeed, a snare, yet to the nations stupidity, yet to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God, for the stupidity of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For you are observing your calling, brethren, that there are not many wise according to the flesh; not many powerful, not many noble, but the stupidity of the world God chooses, that He may be disgracing the wise, and the weakness of the world God chooses, that He may be disgracing the strong, and the ignoble and the contemptible things of the world God chooses, and that which is not, that He should be discarding that which is, so that no flesh at all should be boasting in God’s sight” (I Corinthians 1:20-25).

    Are you going to keep boasting in God’s sight, or are you going to believe Him?


    “Now we obtained, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we may be perceiving that which is being graciously given to us by God, which we are speaking also, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by the spirit, matching spiritual blessings with spiritual words. Now the soulish man is not receiving those things which are of the spirit of God, for they are stupidity to him, and he is not able to know them, seeing that they are spiritually examined. Now he who is spiritual is, indeed, examining all, yet he is being examined by no one. For who knew the mind of the Lord? Who will be deducing from Him? Yet we have the mind of Christ” (I Corinthians 2:11-16).

    Forget your vain reasonings and believe God. “The Lord knows the reasonings of wise, that they are vain” (I Corinthians 3:20).

    From the above, you ought to be able to understand then that “to me it is the least trifle that I should be examined by you or by man’s day” (I Corinthians 4:3).

    The first step in becoming wise is acknowledging how stupid you are without God.

    1. Dear Bob,

      I’m sorry to see that your debate has degenerated into crass name-calling, however, as everyone knows, this is the last resort of one who realizes that he has a losing argument. I have used “the words of Homer and Hesiod” to dispute your words, I have no conflict with “the Creator of heaven and earth,” it is your theory about the origins of Greek mythology that I perceive to be in error (Newsflash! Things that you say, are not necessarily God’s words.).


      For rest of e-mail, go to:

      1. Sorry to vent my frustration in such a way. Those words of Paul do indeed apply to me. I should also be gentle to all and patient. And so I apologize for my frustration which comes from this:
        You don’t use the Concordant translation of the Scriptures which is essential for any serious scholar. You have not read “The Myth of the Goddess” (SB “The Memory of the Adored Woman”), the most comprehensive available book on the post-Flood world. You have not read my books, two of which have been translated into French, one into Greek. In the last 100 pages of “The Parthenon Code,” using the evidence from art and literature, I reconstruct the sculptures of the east pediment of the Parthenon, the place where the Greeks summarize who they are, where they come from, and what they believe. With your theorizing, can you make any sense of what the Greeks tell us in their sculptural themes? No.
        And Re: Homer and Hesiod: The term “father Zeus” is a description of the king of the gods (theoi = placers) which appears over 100 times in Homer. In Hesiod’s Theogony 45, we read “of Zeus, the father of gods and men.” The gods (placers) are the ancestors in the line of Cain. In Plato’s “Euthydemus” Socrates refers to Zeus, Apollo and Athena as his “lords and ancestors.” In Theogony 50, Zeus is called “the aegis-holder.” That means he is the authority. He gives that authority, under him, to Athena. That’s why she wears her aegis. Zeus is the serpent-friendly Adam. Athena is the serpent-friendly Naamah, the one who inspired the rebellion against Noah and his God-fearing offspring, carried out by her grandson Nimrod/Herakles.
        You are arguing about things that have been settled by evidence of which you are not aware. And so what you write seems to me so much babble and wasteful distraction.

      2. Dear Bob,

        I heartfully accept your apology, and I consider it an act of class, on your part, to have proffered it. Now, I feel as though I may have over-reacted a bit in defending myself, for which I too apologize. I am perfectly happy to forget the whole matter and to resume our discourse (unless you think that we have reached an impasse).


        For rest of e-mail, go to:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s