Belief In Marduk

As you all know, Marduk is the ultimate god. When Marduk defeated the chaotic Tiamat and created mankind out of the blood of her rebel husband Qingu, his father Ea bestowed all of his power onto Marduk himself. Fifty gods were then absorbed into Marduk so that the became the supreme being. His tower was built in Babylon, which is the center of the universe. This is all recorded in the Enuma Elish, written around 1800 BCE, which is also known as The Epic of Creation.

However, some people do not believe that Marduk exists. Some are atheist, some are agnostic, and some believe in strange gods. The following is a list of arguments that attempt to explain why Marduk does in fact exist.

The Teleological Argument (Argument from Design) -- Just look at the world around you. Doesn't it seem like a huge coincidence that humans need water to drink, air to breathe, and food to eat, and here we are in a world that supplies all of those things? Did you know that if the earth weren't tilted just so that nothing could live on the planet? Not to mention the beauty all around us: the waterfalls, the rainbows, the mountains. All of it couldn't have come about by chance. There must be a designer. The Enuma Elish tells us that, when Marduk defeated Tiamat, he split her in two and created the earth and the sky. Her tears became the Tigris and Euphrates river. Her breasts became mountains. Marduk established order in the cosmos, telling the stars, moon, and sun how to behave. He set up our calendar and established time itself. None of this would have come about if it were not for Marduk. He is the intelligent designer, and he is the true answer to the question of how things got here: not evolution, which science cannot even prove and is just a theory.

The Cosmological Argument (First Cause) -- Everything that exists has a cause. You know that you came to exist because your mother and father brought you in to this world. They exist because their mothers and fathers brought them into this world. That tree was once an acorn, which came from a previous tree. And so on. So what caused it all? Something had to, right? We know that Ea was Marduk's father and that before Ea there was Anu who was the son of Anshar who was the son of Lahmu who was the son of Tiamat and Apsu, who is known as "the first one." So Apsu was the first one, the first cause, but Ea defeated Apsu and then Ea gave all his powers to Marduk. Therefore, Marduk exists and is -- essentially -- the first cause.

Argument from Morality -- We know that morality exists. Why don't we murder people? Why don't we steal? Why don't we eat babies? Because those things are immoral. But where does this idea of morality come from? If Marduk had not established the cosmic order of the universe, then we would have no morality at all, no right and wrong, and all would be in chaos. We know that Tiamat was evil, not because of anything she did necessarily (though we now call what she did evil), but because Marduk (who is wise above all) felt the need to defeat her. William Lane Craig reasons this way: 1. If Marduk doesn't exist, then morality doesn't exist. 2. Morality does exist. 3. Therefore, Marduk exists. Note that morality is beyond science. Science doesn't care if we shoot someone in the head or not, because science just thinks we're a series of atoms randomly put together. But Marduk cares, and so we don't kill. The fact that murderers are punished proves that all of our laws are based on our belief in Marduk's existence.

The Ontological Argument / Argument from Degree -- This argument says that if we are able to imagine the greatest possible being, then he must exist. Descartes said that he could conceive of a supremely perfect being just as easily as he could perceive of any shape or number. He thinks it; therefore, it is. Anselm of Canterbury said that we can conceive of the greatest thing possible to think of, but if that thing we conceive doesn't actually exist, then it wouldn't be the greatest thing (since existing is greater than not existing). We know that Marduk is this greatest thing. The Enuma Elish says that Marduk sucked from the breasts of goddesses who "filled him with awesomeness," that his father Ea "rendered him perfect," and that "perfect were his members without comprehension." He has four eyes, four ears, and breathes fire. He is described as "the loftiest of the gods." And this was all before he took on the power of all the gods. Such a being is the greatest possible being we can conceive of, and therefore Marduk must exist.

Majority Argument -- The number of people who have believed in Marduk is impossible to count. Why would so many people believe in a god who did not exist? Mass hypnosis? Could everyone be that deluded? Entire cultures were founded on the belief in Marduk, and it was a culture that thrived for ages and still exists in various forms. Could such a culture be founded on something that didn't even exist? Can something be founded on nothing? It wouldn't make sense. Would you even want to live in a society in which the majority of people believe in something that has no basis in reality? What kind of society would that be? Thank Marduk that we don't live in such a world.

Arguments from History and Archeology -- Our main source for historical proof of Marduk is of course the Enuma Elish. But we can see evidence that the book is true from archeology. For example, we can read of the building of the ziggurat of Marduk, known as the Etemenanki, which was built in Babylon by the Anunnaki as an abode for Marduk, Enlil, and Ea. We also, even today, can go look at its ruins. You can also read about this ziggurat (although in a perverted form) in the book of Genesis, where it is commonly referred to as "the Tower of Babel." Because we know that events like these are true, we know that the historical book is true. And because we know the historical book is true, we know that Marduk is true.

Argument from Miracles -- Have you ever had something happen to you or someone you know that no one could explain? Let's say your friend had a brain tumor and then one day it was gone. The doctors couldn't explain it. Or maybe your car went off the road and, instead of crashing into a tree, managed to find just the right path to avoid all of those trees until you were safe. Coincidence, huh? What if every ob-gyn you saw told you that you couldn't have a baby and then you had one? These are called miracles, they happen every day, and they are caused by Marduk. When something happens that defies the known laws of nature, something has to cause them. Without Marduk, miracles wouldn't happen; therefore, he must exist.

Argument from Aesthetics -- I will only cover the Bs: Bach, Band of Horses, Barber, Bartok, Count Basie, The Beach Boys, The Beatles, Beethoven, Belle and Sebastian, Berlin, Berlioz, Bernstein, Chuck Berry, Bizet, Bonnie "Prince" Billy, Bowie, James Brown. Could any of these composers have made such beautiful music without the divine inspiration of Marduk? To think that mere humans could rise to this level of aesthetic perfection is to think very highly of ourselves as a species. Clearly a higher being was involved. Therefore, Marduk exists.

Transcendental Argument -- Everything that we know we know because of Marduk. He is the source of all knowledge. Of course mankind would not be here at all if it weren't for Marduk, but even if we somehow were, we still wouldn't know anything. The fact that I can sit here and logically prove the existence of Marduk is, in itself, proof that he exists. Here is a proof to show what I mean: 1. Knowledge exists. 2. Without Marduk, knowledge doesn't exist. 3. Therefore, Marduk exists. Ea said that Marduk "knows all wisdom," and it is only through him that we know anything at all.

Common Sense Argument -- The 18th Century philosopher Thomas Reid knocked some helpful sense into us with this argument. Some things, he said, are just common sense. You can't go around all day questioning the existence of things that you just know is true from plain old common sense. Have you ever tried to prove that your mother is actually your mother, or do you just accept it? Do you wonder whether a banana will be inside once you peel it, or do you just assume it will be? When a baby drops a ball, does he know everything about Newton's laws of physics, or does he just use his common sense (the sense Marduk gave us) to know it will fall and bounce? We can do the same with Marduk. It is only common sense to assume that he exists.

Burden of Proof / Limitation of Science Argument -- Well then, can you prove that Marduk doesn't exist? The Enuma Elish describes Marduk as "beyond comprehension, unsuited for understanding, difficult to perceive." It would be foolish and insulting to try to prove Marduk in the same way that you would try to prove the speed of a falling object or to explain how an electromagnet works. Marduk is not your science project. He is beyond science. Science is all well and good for certain things, but when it comes to Marduk, I know that science is inadequate, and so I will always believe in Marduk no matter what science says. At any rate, science will never be able to prove that he doesn't exist, and so there is no reason not to believe in him.

Pascal's Wager (Gambit) Argument -- Blaise Pascal set up a hypothetical situation where he stated first that Marduk either (heads) exists or (tails) doesn't: fifty-fifty chance. You have to bet on one or the other, and now he'll flip the coin to see if he exists or not. If you bet that Marduk does exist (heads), then you win everything and lose nothing. But if you bet that he doesn't exist (tails), then you win nothing and lose everything. A no-brainer which side to bet on, huh? Why would you want to be on Marduk's bad side? Remember that, now that the coin has landed on heads, we know for certain that he exists and is as powerful as he has always been described. Marduk will certainly not suffer an unbeliever gladly. So, Pascal says, even if Marduk doesn't exist, it's best to act as if he does, including your belief in him.

Will To Believe Argument / Faith -- In 1896, William James said that sometimes we have to believe in something on faith before we have any real evidence for believing it. Even scientists do this all the time. They hypothesize that something is true, and many of them take their entire lives to prove it. Maybe they do so successfully, maybe they don't, but the fact that they have faith in it is what matters. Suppose you don't have any real evidence to support Marduk's existence. Isn't it better to rely on your faith that he does exist rather than throwing him away just because you can't prove him right this moment? I am confident that, in the by and by, whether in this life or in the underworld, we will be able to have the proof that we want, for we will see Marduk face to face. When that happens, it will all be worth it.