How to justify that the scriptures in The Bible is before any other kind of religion or other unknown civilization and is true?

Hi, I am asking this question on behalf of my friend who is a skeptic.

He has watched many videos regarding a very ancient civilization called the Anunakis. They were an alien civilization from another planet Niburu. It was said that they came to Earth in search of Gold and created the human species from their own DNA just like God from the Bible. The manuscripts regarding their civilization were found and dated back to before the existence of the Bible or Christianity or any other religion. The confusing thing for me is, it has many stories that are a part of the Bible. Such as the Great Flood, Noah and the Ark, Adam and Eve, Moses and the Burning Bush, and many others. His question is, “If there are manuscripts that are dated to be before the Bible and have the same stories as the Bible, how can I believe that the Bible is true and not copied from an older civilization?”.

Since the Bible is written by many other people rather than God himself, knowing the nature of human beings, how can it be said that everything is written is true and exact without any kind of exaggeration or omission? How would we even know if there are any?


Hi Sejal @Sejal_Meripo, great question. First the credibility of this source has to be verified. How is it that we are just hearing about it or only few group of people know about it. Why are we not following the aliens as our God’s then. These things are all made up. Dont take the bait, first what they say has to be correct before answering the rest of the question. Even doing a quick google search, it sounds all made up. It is similar to the Zeitgeist documentary they made several years or decade ago that tries to say that Jesus is pretty much as the other Gods, made up, and that there were other God that had the same story as him. But the answer is in the details. I referred you to another post that has the link to the reply of that video. If you have not watched the Zeitgiest you can watch it and watch the reply.

For your second question, the person has to first believe in God first. Once they do that, then they can be rest assured that the Holy Spirit is reliable and that the bible is an inspired book and not purely man made.

I hope it helps.
God Bless.

1 Like

I too would want to know more about his sources. They do not sound very strong to me. What exactly is he referring to when he says “manuscripts.”


It sounds to me as well that it is all made up or false justification. His sources are from Youtube and some other google searches as well. Coming to manuscripts (@Joshua_Hansen), there was some kind of gold tablets on which the stories were written in a different language. But only some of them were recovered which had translations similar to the Bible. They were similar to Egyptian scripts.

And (@Danageze) thanks for your reply. His concern is that how can I believe in God and the Bible without any proofs that they are true and I should believe in them. He has just one thing, he needs all his doubts cleared before he believes in the Bible and God but not after.


Hey Sejal @Sejal_Meripo, I understand. Tell your friend that there are manyy scholars that have dedicated their life to find the evidence. All it takes is for him is to seek it and find it. Refer him to the many talks on youtube and books about the case for Christ, and many more.

God Bless.

1 Like

@Sejal_Meripo, I welcome u to RZIM connect. And I pray that your convictions will grow even more. I just wanted to recommend a video and a lecture note (Lecture 11.2) from the core module of the RZIM Academy - “WHY TRUST THE BIBLE?” Delivered by Army Orr-Ewing. In fact it was and is still one of my best lecture and it left with no doubt about the Reliability of the Bible.
You might recommend the core module course for your friend or take it yourself. I believe it will be very helpful.
Or maybe there is a laid down protocol that is available to non alumni that can grant them acces to some of the Academy’s material, then u can explore such an avenue. But I really recommend that lecture.
God bless u as u help a THINKER BELIEVE :hugs:

1 Like

I wonder, does he hold other things in his life up to the same standards? Would he need 100% of his doubts cleared before he married someone? Or a 100% guarantee that he would arrive at his destination before getting into a car or airplane? Or a 100% guarantee that a job is the right career move before taking a job? Or a 100% guarantee a procedure would work before having surgery? Or a 100% a meal would not make him sick before eating it?

It seems he probably operates just fine moving through life without a 100% guarantee. Why does he need “all of his doubts” dispelled all of a sudden in this area? That would be inconsistent. Further, the only place where we have complete certainty about anything is in pure mathematics, and God does not fit within that domain of knowledge.

It seems your friend is appealing to an extreme skeptic position. “How can we know anything about anything,” is an untenable view. There must be some place to start and some respect for the work of historians as to the degree of certainty for history. I would recommend looking into authors such as Richard Swinburne and Timothy McGrew who use Bayes Theorem to calculate the probability of certainty for the existence of God, miracles, and other claims found in the Bible.


Hey Sejal, another approach to take with your friend is to start at the beginning. How did the Anunakis get here? How did the universe get here? He is looking for assurance about things he believes. It seems there are only two possibilities for how the universe get here; either it was spit out by a giant universe-creating machine (the multiverse) or God created it,

If by the machine, how did the machine get there? I wonder if your friend really believes in God. That might be a good starting point. If you can establish with reasonable certainty that a Deity in fact created it, then it would follow that if He could do that, overseeing the creation of a book would seem rather trivial.

Regarding the point “how do we know if it is true and exact”, we would know that the same way we study anything, look at all the writings of the time, physical evidence, and any other thing that can shed light on a it. There have been more hours put into this over the centuries than all other books combined, and no one has been able to disprove it. There are questions that arise about seemingly trivial points, like for example was Jesus crucified three days before Easter Sunday, or two? These are worthy of discussion but in no way detract from the core messages of the Bible.

I am also curious where all these manuscripts are that he talks about. There are legions of people who have devoted their entire lives to the study of the origins of the Bible. Never has one mentioned this mysterious document. It seems they have all wasted their lives if such a thing exists, and surely some of them would have drawn focus to it, and Biblical naysayers also.

I pray your friend will see the light, or should I say Light.

1 Like

Thank you for the reply @bbattista. I will give him this approach and hope to get back with more questions.

1 Like

I suppose another thought to consider would be the idea that another civilization having an older account of a story undermines that validity of the same story found in the Bible is based on the assumption that both accounts are false. The person is saying the Bible only says this thing because someone else said it first. But, what bearing does this have on the validity of the statements themselves? If someone else recorded the events of the Exodus before Moses does this mean that Moses’ account was false? Or are there simply two accounts of the same story because they happened? Generally, having two accounts is a stronger indication that the events actually happened.

I only say this to say that even if your friends premises are true it doesn’t follow by necessity that the events found in the Bible are false.


I think this link will help your friend. Michael Heiser has debunked Zecharia Sitchin and his flawed research. He (Sitchin) is dead but I believe that he was responsible for the clamor about Planet X.

1 Like

Hi, I am Sejal’s friend who raised this question.

Firstly, I just want to clarify that I have nothing bad to say about Christianity or any other religion. But from the past 2 years, I have been going to church with her and I also went to other sessions like alpha where I tried to know more about Jesus and the Bible. And this Annunaki thing is just a small thing which came in the middle of a pile of doubts I had. I should also say that I started reading the Bible and to be honest I left it at the beginning itself. The first thing that came into my mind when I read genesis is that why must animals die along with humans in the great flood because of the sins committed by humans? What did they do? I couldn’t go any further having that in my mind. So, I started looking for answers.

I had a friend who is a believer from his childhood. He goes to many countries on missions. He’s been to Australia and I really thought he might have the answer. To my surprise, when I asked him the first thing he said was that there is nothing like that in the bible. He said that no animal was harmed in the great flood. Only humans were wiped off. I sent him the exact verse and asked him to see it. Then he gave an answer I did not expect. He started blaming me for not believing and questioning. He said I am having satan or devil in my mind and he is making me ask all such kinds of questions. He told me to first believe and then I won’t get any such kind of questions. Definitely that was not I was looking for.

I asked him a couple of other questions and to which his response was not satisfactory. He said the same thing as you Danageze did. “You have to first believe in God”. That was not the answer I am looking for. If that is the answer I wanted, I would have believed any religion in the world as they all say the same thing. Believe in their God first. I can’t just go and blindly believe in something by saying to myself just believe in that. It’s like saying to jump from a rooftop and believe you won’t die. I just can’t do that.

And I wanted to reply to @Joshua_Hansen. No, I don’t hold other things in my life up to the same standards. I think that the 100% concept you explained was illogical. What if a Muslim came to me and said what you said and asked me to just believe. Do you want me to do that? I am not 100% sure about that as well. Do you want me to go for it just because he or she asked me to believe? As I said there are many other religions in the world who say the same thing and just tell us to believe. Do you want me to do the same with all of them? I am not telling all of my doubts to be clarified in this area. I am just telling that I want my doubts to be cleared before I believe in something because there are many things that are similar to what I am seeing and listening. No, I wouldn’t marry someone without 100% of my doubts cleared. But I will definitely try to know about her before I marry. I wouldn’t just go and marry her believing she is right for me. No, I wouldn’t hope to reach a destination safely in a car or airplane. But I would definitely choose by doing some research. Not only me. Anyone would do the same thing especially after the tragedy with the missing flight. That is why Malaysian airline sales became low after that. No, I wouldn’t think that job is the right career move before taking a job. But I wouldn’t definitely take a job-related in Biology if I studied Math. I will try to go into a job that I studied for. And no, I won’t know if a meal will make me sick or not. But I wouldn’t definitely go to a badly reviewed restaurant or if I did, I will try to know what I am eating. I wouldn’t just go and eat any fruit in the forest without knowing if it is poisonous or not. I would if I am hungry and I am lost in the forest and didn’t eat anything from a week. Right now I am not in such a situation to choose a religion. I am not in any rush so I would prefer knowing about what I am getting in to. These kinds of examples are the ones that made me question this in the first place.

Even in church once we had a guest speaker who came and said that a Church paster who went to north sentinal islands to preach was killed by the inhabitants because of his mission to spread the gospel. I was shocked when I heard that. That was completely untrue. It was not that he was a Christian or Hindu or a Muslim. They killed him because he went there. Not because he was a Christian who went there to preach. They killed many others who went there. None of them were Christians. The inhabitants just don’t want there lives to be disturbed. If an atheist went there they might have killed him too. That is why that island is to be untouched. I just thought how can he say things like that in front of so many people, without knowing the facts. That’s what made me question things in the first place.

Now I would like to reply to @bbattista. Hi sir. No, I don’t think the universe was created by a giant universe creating machine. The answer is simple. I just don’t know. I don’t know what created the universe. But because I don’t know who or what created the universe I am not ready to say God created it. People didn’t know the earth was round until it was proved that it was actually round. People didn’t know there are other planets in the universe until they were discovered. People in an isolated island don’t know there are other more developed humans outside that island until they see them. I think that just because it hasn’t been answered until now doesn’t mean it was created by God. I will just accept that I don’t know. If you time traveled and took a cell phone to 1500 BC and showed them the things it does they would definitely think it is a miracle. And they will definitely think of you as a God.

People like to get some or the other answer to a question. If they don’t, they would just link it up with something supernatural. I just think time will give us answers. And also You said there are legions of people who have devoted their entire lives to study the origins of Bible. I completely accept that. In fact, what you said was actually true. They have dedicated there entire lives studying and knowing about only the bible. If you are doing your majors in mathematics, would you think about finding a medicine for a deadly disease? I just think that is it. They are so involved in knowing about the bible they couldn’t look anything out of that.

Again I may be completely wrong. My answer is I just don’t know. I would completely accept that I don’t know and I definitely wouldn’t tell God knows the answer. And I would like to talk about the Annunakis more. Sorry if I am being disrespectful. I really don’t intend that. I hope you guys understood my doubts and reasoning.

1 Like

Hi @Sejal_Meripo and Sejal’s friend,
Sejal’s friend, you show a lot of passion! Sometimes it’s good to stir things up, and remind us that we need to be able to answer (hard) questions about our beliefs. The very idea of “belief” can be hard to define - we think we know what it means until we have to define it, and define then what we believe and why. Do you “believe in chance?” That can mean “do I believe that there is such a thing as chance,” or “am I willing to commit my life entirely to chance.” In mathematics the whole issue of chance is put into the form of probability. A mathemation told me once that chance, or probability is nothing more than a measure of our ignorance of how things work. He is convinced that as we get to know the intricacies of quantum mechanics and all those other strange worlds of physics, we will be better and better able to predict accurately and precisely what is going to happen. And we will also be able to understand what has happened. So actually, according to this mathematician, there is no reality to “chance” - it is only another measure for ignorance! But about the Anunnaki…

If you wish to know more about the Annunakis, you can read a little more on Wikipedia. And you can get additional references there. Don’t look at just one source of information. Wikipedia is a source and it is easily accessible - but because it is written in a process of discussion and is not always confirmed by experts in the field of the topic, you need to be careful. You should also check in reputable encyclopedias. You can find another scholarly description at the site of the museum of the University of Pennsylvania.

The entry in Wikipedia says (among other things) " The Anunnaki (also transcribed as Anunaki , Annunaki , Anunna , Ananaki , and other variations) are a group of deities who appear in the mythological traditions of the ancient Sumerians, Akkadians, Assyrians, and Babylonians. Descriptions of how many Anunnaki there were and what role they fulfilled are inconsistent and often contradictory. In the earliest Sumerian writings about them, which come from the Post-Akkadian period, the Anunnaki are the most powerful deities in the pantheon, descendants of An and Ki, the god of the heavens and the goddess of earth, and their primary function is to decree the fate of Sumerians."

The Sumerians, Akkadians, Assyrians, and Babylonians lived in what is now Iraq and Syria today. So the Anunnaki were the regional equivalents of the Greek gods of ancient times. And they are just as mythical. Abram (later named Abraham) in the Bible came from this area. He had an encounter with God (not one of the Anunnaki) and was told to leave that place and “go west” so he did, until he got to what we know as Paliestine. Most ancient religions had many gods, much like the Hindus of today. What was successively revealed from Abraham through to Moses was that there is only one God. And He (not they) chose them to be “my people.”

There are quite a few movements around the world today to try to resuscitate pre-christian religions - for example druidism in the UK, the viking religion in Scandinavia, and so on. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are people who are trying, for whatever reason, to resuscitate the religions of the ancient middle east. And the old myths make for good stories and very good movies - neither of which mean they are true. A lot of themes of western literature are rehashes of ancient Greek literature based on their myths.

If the myths of Anunnaki include the idea that they “came to earth” this could only be true if the earth predated them. And that says nothing about who made the earth. Many other myths have stories of how the earth was created, and how man was made and why there is good and evil.

I grew up surrounded by people who hated the chameleon (you know that creature that can change colour and move its eyes in different directions? And when it walks it puts one two-toed foot very, very, very, slowly and carefully ahead of the other, so nobody around will notice.) They hated it and would kill any that they saw, because in their stories God sent the chameleon to earth with the message of life, and he sent the tortoise with the message of death. Well, the tortoise, slow though he was as everybody knows (!), he got to earth before the chameleon, and that is why we have death around us today. It’s all the chameleon’s fault. I hope you don’t believe that! But what proof do you have that it’s not true?


1 Like

Hi Sejal’s friend! I have to say it is a pleasure to hear from you and I personally found nothing you said to be even remotely disrespectful. You have strong beliefs and are willing to share them. That is precisely why we are all here … to have these kinds of discussions.

I will focus only on the point I made and you responded to. I am convinced that God will never be proven or disproven no matter how advanced our scientific knowledge is. But that does not mean we should not look at the evidence as we know it and draw the most logical conclusions from it.

For thousands of years Christians believed God created the universe without the backing of science. Even though science could never disprove the existence of God, Christians were ridiculed for having this seemingly far-fetched belief. it was entirely taken on faith by them.

Over the last 20 or 30 years, slowly, the very science Christians were accused of ignoring began making discoveries that led the open minded to wonder if the universe was created after all. Groups of scientists began assembling the discoveries into books and papers that could not be ignored. Hugh Ross and the Reasons to Believe group are a case in point.

These discoveries became a huge distraction for the atheist community, who had to come up with something to counter it. If the odds that a universe that could support life are overwhelmingly small, then the only other hope is that if there are an infinite number of other universes out there, then the odds get better, and voila!, the multiverse theory was born. And how did all these universes get there? A mechanism whereby universes spawn other universes was posited.

So what happened here is the very science that was the cudgel for beating Christians became the undoing of the atheists’ position.

Based on the things we know, one of these two things HAD to happen; either it was created by a Creator, or it was spawned from a preceding universe, an activity that necessarily must have been going on infinitely. And how this spawning mechanism was put in place is also a mystery. I suppose it could be argued that maybe there is a third option and we just don’t know what it is, but this really seems like a placeholder to justify avoiding this question.

So when I personally look at the only two options there are, I cannot arrive at but one conclusion, although that conclusion cannot be scientifically be proven. The answer seems painfully obvious to me.

It’s kind of like if you are walking in a woods never before inhabited, and you find a watch on the ground, do you assume the watch was created, got there by natural causes, or are not sure because it cannot be proven how the watch got there?

It in no way impacts any of the other points you brought up, but it seems to me this is the core starting point for any of those discussions.

I thank you again for your earlier feedback.

1 Like

Sejal’s friend, in looking at some of the info on Nibiru & the Annunaki, it would appear that the story you cite comes from a 1976 book by Zecharia Sitchin (mentioned in an earlier response). This planet is tied in as being Planet X which some say will collide with the earth & lead to an apocalypse. There is a lot of sci-fi in these theories (sci-fi borrows heavily from ancient mythologies for names & concepts).

In looking at your response, I get the feeling that we are all bouncing around many different topics without actually dealing with the real question you have. Could you think through your questions and pick the biggest one to post here? Then we can talk about that. If we are able to help with that one, then maybe you can ask the next biggest question, and so on.

1 Like

Hi @Sejal_Meripo,

Thank you for your response! I appreciate your willingness to engage with the ideas. My response was mainly stemming from this part of a previous post.

I certainly would not want someone to simply believe without understanding or giving thought to what is being presented to them. That is not what I am communicating in the least and would be antithetical to the concept of faith found in Scripture. My stipulation was that just as you would give reasonable consideration to other aspects of life, this aspect should also be held up to reasonable consideration. As opposed to UNreasonable consideration.

My point was that, to have 100% of your doubts settled before marrying someone, riding in a car, and eating a meal is UNreasonable, so too is waiting until 100% of your doubts are dispelled before believing in something. This is not to say that a reasonable search and investigation should not be performed.

In fact, I would recommend, if a Muslim approached you, that you should give that religion a reasonable investigation. I think you would find the tenants of that belief system to be unreasonable.

So no, I would not agree with the bellow statement as I was not suggesting you believe anything by “just believing.”

I would, however, support this statement:

My only issue is that many start their “search” with unreasonable standards such as the one mentioned above. They say they will not believe in God without proof. Yet, they believe many other things without their meeting this same standard. That is the contradiction I wished to point out, nothing more. I encourage you to keep asking questions and earnestly seeking answers to those questions. However, seeking answers must be done without a standard that can only be met in pure mathematics.

I just want to reiterate that I would never encourage someone just to believe something without understanding it. In fact, there is a whole body of philosophical work that would argue it is impossible to truly believe something without understanding it first.

Please ask any questions you have and the community here would be glad to engage with you! I appreciate your willingness to seek truth.

1 Like

Hi Sejal friend; @Sejal_Meripo interesting response that was given to the previous posts. On one hand it is easy to say that there is not enough evidence to believe; that the world was created, that Christianity is true, the Jesus was real, that the resurrection happened. But in each of these situations one must also demonstrate that something else is true and that other possibilities have more verifiable evidence to lead a thinking person to accept the consequences of believing in this other possibility. All of the evidence must then be put together into one comprehensive worldview that is experientially meaningful for living. So not only do you have to answer the question of origin in a meaningful way, but you must also answer the questions of life’s purpose, how to live life, and where do we go when life on this earth is over. These 4 areas allow for a life to be well lived.

As I read the information for Annunaki from Niburu, the responses that were given are trying to show that the information is not very trust worthy and don’t seem to answer these questions well. But for some reason you are drawn to it….can you explain why you have rejected one and are drawn to the other.

I am sorry to hear that you have not gotten very good answers to your questions in the past, hopefully this form will do a better job. If I could encourage you to continue to engage.

I like the last post by @petros555 If you could have one question answered, if you could meet with God or Annunaki face to face; what would be your number one question that you would like answered?