Poseidon and Hephaestus were originally the same god

Agni (or Apam Napat) was only used to let us know the characteristics of H2epom Nepots. Considering Mycenaean religion and PIE religion are thousands of years apart, H2epom Nepots can not be considered a connection without an intermediary like Enki. My opponent has made a lot of minor arguments. For example he also mentioned there was a ram in both Agni’s and Enki’s myth. Do I have to say something like “Okay, I concede this point. It's true that there was a ram. But, so what? ” every single time? Therefore, I only focus on his main argument, which is clearly stated in his conclusion of the first round. If I dropped a "connection", it means that I agree that it exists, it doesn't mean that it really worths anything. Whether those minor arguments are enough to back up my opponent's resolution is up to the voters to decide. KhnumMy opponent has agreed with the similarities between Khnum and Enki, he only rejected the idea that Khnum was an adaption of Enki with the argument that Khnum was a southern god. He also used an example of Native American myths to back up his point, but it’s a false comparison. It's geographically impossible for Sumerian myth to go to America but it's not geographically impossible for it to go to southern Egyptian. I will talk more about Khnum later in the argument with Tatjenen. Enki as the creator GodMy opponent said that my view too narrow, then I will say that his view is too general. When you make a general summary, everything will become similar to each other. Ptah created the world by thought and words. That’s something supernatural, and we knows that Ptah is omnipotent and he is above our comprehension. On the other hand, Enki thinked and made a plan, then instructed others what to do. That’s something achievable for human. The difference in scale is obvious. My opponent also said that "Like Ptah, Enki was revered more for his intellectual deeds than his physical deeds". Well, that's why I said his view is too general. Using that logic, a psychic and a CEO must be the same then. The statement “Enki's role as a creator of the world is described in Enki and the World Order” is also false. Enki didn’t create the world, he only made it more inhabitable for human, as he is the protector of mankind. Unlike Enki, Ptah is responsible for the whole universe. Again, the difference in scale is obvious. SourcesMy opponent accused me of falsely attacking his source. But it is not true. He used “Enki and Ninhursag” to back up his argument, but the first time he mentioned it is in Round 4. "Enki and Ninmah" was mentioned and used for a different argument. Therefore my criticization of his lack of evidence in Round 3 is valid. Now he has shown the source, I will accept that “Enki determined the destinies of all things”. However, in Round 3 I also asked about the source for “Ptah represented the ability of artists and craftmen to envision their finish work, and then bring it into being”. Because my opponent has ignored this, therefore it’s safe to assume that he conceded this point. TatjenenMy opponent tried to combine two different myths into one in order to make a connection. Nefertem was orginally an aspect of Atem (he was called the young Atem) [1], that's why he was associated with the lotus. Later, Nefertum came to be considered as a seperate god from Atem, and Ptah became the chief god of Egypt. That’s when Nefertum was assigned the role of Ptah’s son [2]. In the myth where Nefertem was born from a lotus, he had no parents. In the myth where he was Ptah’s son, he had a mother – Sekhmet. These are two different myths and can’t be combined. If Nefertem was both born from a lotus and Ptah’s son then what is Sekhmet’s role in his birth? In short, my opponent couldn’t prove that Ptah is Tatjenen. On the other hand, he didn’t refute my point that Khnum is Tatenen, which means he admitted it’s true. By his own effort to prove that Tatjenen came from Enki, he has proved that Khnum is more likely an adaption of Enki than Ptah. Summary of the debate My opponent's main argument is both Poseidon and Hephaetus are adaption from the Sumerian god Enki. I have shown the difference between Ptah and Enki. I have even shown another Egyptian god, Khnum, who is more likely an adaption of Enki than Ptah. - The scale of power between Ptah and Enki are different. Ptah created the whole universe while Enki only created men. Egyptian myth has another god, Khnum, who created men from silt (Enki created men from clay) who is also a water god and associated with crafts like Enki. - Enki rose from the primordial waters of the Abzu is similar to Tatjenen rose from the primordial waters of Nun. My opponent failed to prove that Ptah is Tatjenen while I have proved that Khnum is Tatjenen. - When comparing the Egyptian myth and Sumerian myth to Hindu myth, we can see that both Tatjenen and Enki are similar to Vishnu. Again, Ptah is not Tatejnen, Khnum is. Therefore, I’ve broken the connection between Haephatus and Enki (through Ptah). As the result, I can say that my opponent has failed to prove that Poseidon and Haephatus is the same god. As the last words I want to thank my opponent for this great debate. I've learnt a lot from him and from my own research in preparation of my arguments. [1] . http://www.egyptianmyths.net...;[2] . http://ancientegyptonline.co.uk...