It is, and you pretending it isn't makes it clear you are either dishonest or ignorant.
I have no need to deflect on a subject which I've broached--even here--before. Look through my past posts.
I spent years at university studying exactly this.
And this means what? I took courses on religion at University. That qualifies my argument no more or less than it does yours. Hence, I told you to "do your research," not "believe in my authority."
You, what? Read a few apologetics blogposts?
I don't read blogs.
Considering how you are unable to give any actual evidence or academic sources it seems likely that is the case.
"Unable" is not the same as "unwilling." I have no intention of having an "academic" debate on this. We're not in school. We're using reason, and logical construction with the application of dated information.
Let's start with the Norse, shall we? The Norse didn't write their own
stories down, or, at least, it seems they didn't as we have no sources
written by the Norse about their own mythology. What is essentially the
only pre-Christian source we have comes in the form of Tacitus's
'Germania', which is not the most helpful of sources as it records some
basic information but does the classic Roman Synchronism and thus we
have to guess which gods correlate with the Roman gods that Tacitus used
in his writings. We have basically nothing of their mythology here
though.
We don't really get much until Snorri writes the Prose Edda in
about it in 1200CE, but he does the classic thing where he says the
Norse gods are Trojan Heroes that fled to the north and were worshipped.
He also wrote the Prose Edda for political purposes to unify Norway and
Iceland, so there is going to be the absolute Christian and political
bias involved in this first telling of the myths, and it was written 200
years after Scandinavia became Christian, so while they can be useful
they also remain unreliable on some level.
What evidence do you have of Snorri's absolute Christian and political bias strictly as it pertains to the delineation of Norse mythology?
(Note, I accept arguments as evidence.)
We also have cave paintings from the Nordic Bronze Age (which
lasted from around 1700BCE - 500BCE) that some archaeologists suggest
depict Mjolnir and some that depict Skinfaxi (and other aspects that
survived until it was recorded by Snorri and others), thus the Norse
pantheon has roots to this early in time.
If
we wish to try, on any level, to connect this pantheon to anything
earlier than this or outside of this we have to assume they adopted a
lot of their ideas from Mycenaean Greece, who they traded with on some
level, but at that point it would be an assumption that is impossible to
support with evidence.
How is this any less of an assumption than alleging that someone's "Christian Bias" especially after Scandinavia converted to Christianity compelled one to misrepresent Norse mythology? Why is assuming that Scandinavians retelling and adopting the mythologies from Mycenaean Greece is any more of an assumption than your first one?
What makes the connection even more dubious is that the Mycenaean Greeks
don't have any known parallels with these in their religions.
Not every deity will be depicted exactly the same when their stories are transmuted across regions. This is most apparent in Zeus and Amun-Ra, (which you still have yet to address by the way) Gefjun and Demeter and Perswa, etc.
The later Greeks do, but that would suggest that they would have gotten
the idea from the Norse rather than the other way around.
Assuming of course, that the later Greeks didn't just transmute their telling from the Mycenaean convention, which wouldn't require the Norse to be the first tellers. And the Greeks weren't the first to come up with their mythologies.
Thus you would have to assume these mythological connections went from Sumeria to Scandinavia
No, one wouldn't. You left some connections out. Let's gauge your purported intense study. The Mycenaean were located in what's known today as the Balkan peninsula. What other mythologies had influence there? (Hint: I've already mentioned one of them.)
I would love to see the evidence of this.
I cannot give you evidence for a non sequitur.
I don't have time to do this with literally every religion,
What you have time to do is irrelevant. You either do or you don't, and if you don't, then don't mention it.
The Sumerians lasted from 5400 BCE - 1750 BCE, the religion having
its origins in the earlier part of this or possibly stemming from
pre-Sumerian mythos.
Lucifer ultimately
stems from the Canaanite god Attar and is associated with the planet
Venus. Now, unless you wish to say any god associated with the planet
Venus is automatically Luciferian then it is hard to go any further back
than Attar, maybe Helel from a reconstructed earlier Canaanite
myth but that is relying on reconstruction of a myth without much text
surviving to know for sure of Attar and Helel are connected.
So,
can we somehow connect Helel as the inspiration of the Sumerian gods?
Not even close. Canaan didn't even have much of any immigration into the
region until around 4500 BCE! We don't even see records of what we
understand to be the Canaanite pantheon until about 3000 BCE at the
earliest.
The only hope you have at
preserving the idea that the Sumerian gods are derivatives of Lucifer is
if you take any god that is associated with Venus as being associated
with Lucifer, which gets you one, just one of the Sumerian
pantheon, the goddess Inanna. Now you have the tall task of showing that
every god from every pagan religions somehow stems from Inanna. If any
of them stem not from Venus or Inanna then they are not 'Luciferian'.
No, the Canaanite God, Attar stems from Lucifer, not the other way around. Now earlier I stated that Lucifer was a trinity, albeit a sinister one. How did I describe it? Father God (Horned God) Mother Goddess and the Divine Child (i.e. "hermaphrodite" child.) Now from where does the term "hermaphrodite" stem? It stems from the greek god Hermaphroditus who was the god of hermaphrodites and effeminates. Hermaphroditus was also known as Erotes, the winged god of Love. Now if we analyze their Roman counter parts, the connection is visible. Who was the consort of Mercury and the mother of Cupid?
And yes, Inanna is an incarnation of Lucifer as well, most notably illustrated in the descent of Inanna when she comfronts her sister Ereshkigal in their conflict over Damuzid--though some tellings may replace Damuzid with his father Enki. These trinities reappear in every mythology. And the pantheons are just incarnations of Father God, Mother Goddess, and Divine Child.
By the way, before this gets lost in our on-going discussion, what kind of pagan are you, as you would describe it? Why do you wear a pentagram necklace?
