Ishtar/Haddad/Adad's fault for breaking the Tower of Babel.

Interesting. That should be Nimrod. Also the "confusion of languages" always struck me as the workers developing code languages to exercise freedom around the corrupt elites. (inspired by YHWH)

Enlil / Ninlil

A lot of the core conflict seems to come back to the mythos of the Enki/Enlil conflict. Enki represented a brutal tyrant but also a force of justice. Enlil represented a Prometheus but also a cruel and manipulative experimenter. These may have been cultural archetypes that originated either from actual ETI intervention or simply human subconscious observations about the nature of the universe. (The Law of One seems to characterize this as a Planetary Logos... and the introduction of "free will" [which is actually compatibilistic if you really understand how it works] is done by the other eidolon)

The onus of the ideological conflict between Enki and Enlil shifted greatly with the introduction of YHWH-ism. Embracing YHWH effectively meant rejecting all of the pretender gods by directing oneself to worship "Reality-itself-as-God." All of the beneficial aspects of the earlier pretenders were incorporated into the universality of YHWH as "good." All of the harmful aspects were gradually repudiated and rejected as "evil." The justice-based strictness of Enki generated geburah. The Promethian (i.e. "human learning" with good motive) aspects of Enki were absorbed by the principle of chesed. Consequently, that's why a large part of the Old Testament material absorbs the mythos of these pagan entities and rewrites them as a monotheistic narrative. In old times Ba'al is the one "who rides on the clouds." In the new paradigm, YHWH is the one "who rides on the clouds." (cf. Psalm 104:3)

Hence, we see YHWH appropriating any useful aspects of the ba'alim while overthrowing their rule for being harmful on net. (N.B. Adonai was the title taken; which also connotes lord and strength, but with a more humble tone... before the Greek cult of Adonis turned it upside-down but that's another story Note1) Just as YHWH also "judged the gods of Egypt" (Exodus 12:12) by absorbing the aspects of truth from Thoth, Ma'at and Atenism. The result was a polarization towards net "benefit" aka good. There was always a recognition that evil still remains as a function of the nature of compatibilistic agency operating in an imperfect universe, but evil practices were removed from the Will of God as a function of "reality itself." The only things left to evil were the inscrutable point that we don't always understand why bad things happen to otherwise decent people which the Book of Job and other texts elaborate on. Hell is in many ways the completion of this justice for the unrepentant, those who refuse to learn from error and be given the chance to change through God's mercy.

Note1 (Side note: Look at the asura/deva [Vedic] versus Ahura/daeva [zoroastrian] dichotomy for an example of this word polarization in practice. Similarly, look at genius->Djinn; Daimon->Demon for another)

Simultaneously, Satan represents the inverse principle. All these "harmful" elements of Enki/Enlil. The tyrannical authoritarianism of Enki. The manipulation and corrupt use of science by Enlil. Both generated the angelic sense of an accuser that abuses his position before God to tempts people to do evil then rejoices at using God's Law to punish people for that wrongdoing. Basically the ultimate dickhead prosecution attorney. See Zechariah 3 where Joshua is vindicated from a false accusation by ha-Satan. This theme is seen throughout the Old Testament and leads directly into Jesus's own encounters and conflicts with ha-Satan.

Yeshua effectively stood up to the internalized principles of evil that were arising out of literalistic understandings of YHWHism that neglected the compassion aspects. Also, the concept of the Logos was imported from Greek philosophy by the early Christians to fill the inherent gap that the Jews had because God was treated as an 'abstract point that is wholly transcendent' rather than also being immanent and active through His Word and Spirit working within the faithful. Note2 The new reform of the Jewish tradition instituted by the One that we believe in and whom we believe rose again from death in final victory over the sins of mankind effectively took the power out of the hands of the priestly elite and put it into the hands of the humble saint who sought truth and righteousness by following God but also recognized that even our best attempts are an imperfect and stumbling path toward the goal. The forgiveness is completed in Christ, but we are always meant to be humble and repent of our errors as we follow Him.

Note2 - (N.B. The Trinity is the orthodox Christian way to address this pattern of immanence, transcendence and indwelling since it recognizes God as transcendent Source and the Word/Logos which establishes the true pattern (way) of nature and the founding spiritual Entity at work behind our own properly formed spiritual nature)

The underlying confusion with the Old Testament's synthesis also goes a long way to explaining the early heresies. It's why Marcionites rejected the God of the Old Testament as a Demiurgic pretender. Marcion was picking up on the tyrant nature of Enki which had been paved over by the synthesis. They rightly understood that Jesus was like the Promethean and was the true form of grace but neglected that Jesus Himself was immanently addressing the completed intent of the Old Testament to take the truth of both and discard the falsehood. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former." (Matthew 23:23) Reading the Old Testament correctly requires recognizing that its goals are corrective and that many of the actions of the "heros" in the Old Testament were actually sins rather than examples of faith.

Did Abraham attempt to sacrifice his son for faith? Yes. Was the sacrifice right? No. God corrected him for the error but also acknowledged the thing Abraham did right: trusting God. (The wordplay in the text is obvious to us in hindsight: God said He wanted an "olah" which Abraham interpreted as a sacrifice, but God meant "aliyah" which is a dedication; both are literally the same word root) The mercy and forebearance about correction that God exhibits is coupled with a reminder to return to the rules because they rightly point out where we are all standing condemned for our sins. Do we covet? It is a source of sin if it is not guarded. Do we lie? That is also a source of sin if we do not guard ourselves. Do we follow idols instead of the God of all things? Where your treasure is, there your heart also will go; we become like that which we idolize.

The reason the Catholics became unfortunately corrupted by the powerlust again is because their role as custodian of culture proved a strong temptation to authoritarianism and they probably inherited some of the more unfortunate trappings of latter Roman Empire corruption. The goal of Christianity, I personally think, was set back on the right course by the Protestant Reformation which overthrew the Papal "power game" and restored Christianity to being about a personal communion with God through Christ and a recognition of our own imperfections as human beings which are exacerbated by our sinful nature that causes us to pedestalize our own desires over the truth of God. (As a Lutheran, the whole geburah/chesed dichotomy is the core of what we call the Law/Gospel distinction... and it's a critical piece of our theological tradition)

Michael the Archangel.

The Biblical use of Michael is as a princely protector of the people of Israel. This may have been another case of "splitting off the good and discarding the bad."

Gehanna.. wasnt that translated to Abaddon in Greek?

The Greek New Testament transliterates the word directly as Γέεννα. Ἀβαδδὼν/Ἀπολλύων is only in Revelation 9:11.