Introduction
As one begins to study the story of the
biblical flood, one learns that there are numerous ancient stories that also
describe a great deluge. This paper will focus singularly on the Akkadian flood
account known as the Epic of Gilgamesh. Scholarly works tend to focus mainly on
the similarity of a few lines; however, this paper will begin by presenting a
walkthrough of the entire epic in order to demonstrate how little is actually
congruent between the two stories.[1] This
paper seeks to answer the following: did the writer of Genesis borrow from this
account? Ultimately, the Genesis flood narrative refuted Ancient Near Eastern
flood mythologies, and demonstrated God's justice and love in a lost and sinful
world.
The Epic of Gilgamesh
The
Epic of Gilgamesh is part of twelve tablets which were originally discovered in
Ashurbanipal’s library located at Nineveh and has since been discovered in
Sumerian, several dialects of Akkadian, Hittite and Hurrian.[2] However,
archaeological evidences point to a much earlier dating. Heidel’s dating
demonstrates that the age of the tablets, especially those containing the Old
Babylonian cuneiform, goes back before the second millennium B.C. and was
compiled over time from several sources and verbal traditions passed down.[3]
Gilgamesh is unique
because of his lineage. While his father is an unknown mortal, his mother was
the goddess Ninsun.[4] The deific origins of
Gilgamesh continually come up throughout the epic, “Two-(thirds) of him is god
and [one-third of him is man].”[5] Furthermore,
other gods granted Gilgamesh gifts above other mortals: Shamash gave him
comeliness, Adad gave him heroism, and the gods made his form surpassing all
other men.[6]
Because of
Gilgamesh’s selfish actions, “Great Araru they called: ‘Thou, Araru, didst
create [Gilgamesh (?)]; Now create his equal, to the impetuosity of his heart
let him be eq[ual]. Let them ever strive (with each other), and let Uruk (thus)
have re[st].”[7] Uruk’s citizens cried out
asking Araru creates Enkidu.[8]
Gilgamesh and Enkidu soon battle each other.[9] In
the end, Gilgamesh and Enkidu come to a draw with Enkidu praising Gilgamesh’s
strength.[10]
The beginning
of Tablet III is missing; however, when the epic resumes, Gilgamesh and Enkidu
have become partners. Gilgamesh tries to persuade Enkidu to accompany him by
attacking Ḫumbaba within a cedar forest.[11]
The end of their battle is not readable; however, based on the next tablet, it
is clear that they are victorious and return to Uruk.[12]
After Gilgamesh and
Enkidu return, Ishtar, a goddess, proposes to Gilgamesh in the hopes that he
would wed her; however, Gilgamesh refuses her proposal sending Ishtar into a
tirade.[13]
She calls upon her father, Anu, to create a bull from heaven to defeat
Gilgamesh.[14] The bull attacked Enkidu;
however, Enkidu fought back, entreating Gilgamesh to join in the frantic
battle. Gilgamesh and Enkidu are again victorious, offering the heart as a
sacrifice to Shamash.[15] After
a celebratory feast, Gilgamesh and Enkidu lay down to sleep. Enkidu receives a
dream-vision of a counsel in the heavens. The gods banter over whom to kill,
Gilgamesh or Enkidu. Ultimately, Enkidu dies in the presence of his beloved
friend Gilgamesh.[16]
During some destroyed portion ending
Tablet VIII, Gilgamesh hears of Utnapishtim, because by Tablet IX, Column I, line
6, Gilgamesh is seeking him out.[17] Gilgamesh
sets out on a harrowing journey, seeking Utnapishtim. Column II records the
conversation between Gilgamesh and a scorpion-man who controls the gates of the
mountain. Ultimately, the scorpion-man allows Gilgamesh to continue on his
journey through darkness that lasts for “eleven double-hours.”[18]
On the far side of the journey,
Gilgamesh comes upon a garden of precious stones and a barmaid named Siduri.
Gilgamesh explains to Siduri his plight after watching Enkidu suffer and die.[19]
Siduri explains to Gilgamesh that death was part of that creation and Gilgamesh
should enjoy his days instead of pursuing this fruitless journey.[20]
This response sends Gilgamesh into a fitful rage and begins to break things.[21]
Gilgamesh returns from breaking items and meets a man who introduces himself
as, “Sursunabu, belonging to Utnapishtim the Distant.”[22] Because
Gilgamesh destroyed the items, he has to do something for Sursunabu: he has to
cut 120 punting poles, put bitumen and plates upon the poles, and brings them
back to Sursunabu.
Once Gilgamesh finished this task, they
boarded the ship and glided along a river until they reached the waters of
death. Gilgamesh has to use all 120 poles he made in the forest to push along
the waters of death in order to reach Utnapishtim.[23] Gilgamesh
finally arrives to where Utnapishtim and his wife live and the reason he
journeyed for so long to find him, “shall I not like unto him lie down and not
rise forever”?[24] Utnapishtim seems to
respond in similar fashion, “The Annunaki, the great gods, [gather together];
Mammetum, the creatress of destiny, decrees with them the destinies. Life and
death they allot; the days of death they do not reveal”.[25]
Thus, Tablet XI begins with Gilgamesh
asking Utnapishtim how he entered “into the company of the gods and obtain life
(everlasting).”[26] Utnapishtim responds by
telling him the secret of how he received this gift. Ea, one of the gods,
addresses Utnapishtim through his wall and commands him to abandon all his
possessions and build a ship.[27]
Utnapishtim asks Ea what he should tell the townsfolk of Shurippak; Ea’s
response is that the god Enlil and Ea are mad at each other and can no longer
stand to be around each other, so Ea is leaving the city and Utnapishtim should
deceive the locals by telling them a lie in order to survive the flood.[28]
Utnapishtim thus began telling the
locals that he will follow his lord to the deep [apsû].[29] The
villagers, believing the lie, began to bring him many things. Utnapishtim
follows through by building a boat in two
days that is an acre square, consisting of seven floors for a total height of
ten dozen cubits, with each floor plan divided into nine parts.[30] Utnapishtim
then launches the boat into the water, “[the launching] was very difficult, so
that they had to shift the floor planks above and below, [until] two-thirds of
[the structure] [had g]one [into the water].”[31] This
was a test-launch of the boat in order to test the weight distribution.[32] Utnapishtim
then tells Gilgamesh all that was taken on board, “[Whatever I had], I laded
upon her: whatever I had of silver I laded upon her; whatever I [had] of gold I
laded upon her; whatever I had of all the living beings I [laded] upon her. All
my family and all my kin I made go aboard the ship. The beasts of the field,
the wild creatures of the field, all the craftsmen I made go aboard.”[33]
The appointed time came and Utnapishtim
boarded the ship and battened everything down. What followed was a storm that
the gods were not simply overseeing, but within.[34] The
south-storm lasted for one day, and then the gods became frightened by the
deluge they caused and retreated to heaven while the storm lasted for another
six days and nights.[35]
The boat finally
came to a halt on Mount Nisir; after which, Utnapishtim sent a dove that returned,
a swallow that returned, and then finally a raven which did not return.
Utnapishtim opens the boat and offers a sacrifice of seven cult-vessels that
included cane, cedar, and myrtle. This pleased the gods who hold a counsel
around his sacrifice.[36] Enlil,
learning that Utnapishtim discerned the message of the gods and survived the
flood, goes aboard the boat with Utnapishtim and his wife and bestows
immortality upon the couple.[37]
While Utnapishtim
is telling Gilgamesh the story, he begins to nod off. Utnapishtim and his wife
devise a ruse to play on Gilgamesh in order to send him on his way.[38]
The trick works, and Gilgamesh prepares to leave. Utnapishtim’s wife asks her
husband to give Gilgamesh something that he may return to his land. This
induces Utnapishtim to reveal a rare plant at the bottom of a deep sea that
would give Gilgamesh new life.[39]
Gilgamesh, by tying large stones around his ankles, retrieves the plant (line
274), but chooses to wait to eat it until he returns to Uruk. However, while on
the return journey, a snake steals the plant while Gilgamesh bathes in a pool
(line 288).[40]
The Biblical Flood in Contrast
Wenham states,
“At least seventeen features appear in both stories, usually in the same order.”[41] However,
numerous details in stark contrast demand some attention. These contrasts deal
with both the theological as well as the physical realm. This section will
review some of the major differences. Davis states, “The divergencies between
the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis, however, are also numerous, and at times they
are fundamental.”[42]
The story of the biblical flood occurs
merely six chapters after the creation of the world. God is justifiably angry
at the sin of mankind itself. The Gilgamesh Epic builds on the point that Gilgamesh
has abused his powers and then becomes afraid of death after the loss of his
friend Enkidu. However, in the Genesis account, the story is one of sadness as
the story of man and sin unfold. “Until this point the Scripture has discussed
the sins of individuals: Adam, Eve, Cain, and Lamech. Now for the first time
the emphasis shifts to the sins of a group, ‘the sons of God,’ with the result
that God’s punishment is directed not against a man, but against mankind.”[43]
The main characters are quite
different. Noah is not the mixed offspring of a goddess and mortal. The
biblical text does not state that Noah is a ruler of a city. Noah’s deeds and
actions do not cause people to cry out to the gods to send someone to fight him
as an equal. Where the Epic contrasts Gilgamesh to his surroundings based on
his actions of strength, valor, womanizing, and wisdom; Genesis presents Noah
as the only person living righteously for God.[44]
Another aspect
concerning the main characters is that Noah is not searching for immortality. In
the Gilgamesh Epic, “Seeking an answer to his anguish, he [Gilgamesh]
determines to find Utnapishtim, the only mortal according to Babylonian legend
ever to gain immortality.”[45] Gilgamesh
ultimately learns that Ea sought out Utnapishtim in order to thwart Enlil’s
plans of destroying all of humanity.[46]
However, Noah found grace within the eyes of the LORD, not in order to thwart
another god’s plan, but to demonstrate judicial fairness and love. !xe, [translated "grace"]
carries the idea in that "God’s grace is thus finally rooted, not in what
people do, but in his [God’s] disposition to be gracious in ways beyond any
human formula or calculation."[47] A
crucial theme that the Bible solely focuses on is this deliberate choice by God
to save Noah.[48]
God chose the flood because man had
become wicked in the ultimate sense. Genesis 6:5 states, “And GOD saw that the
wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”[49]
Sarna points out that the beginning phrase “The LORD saw […] has judicial overtones, implying both
investigation of the facts and readiness for action.”[50] In
contrast, the Gilgamesh Epic does not record why the gods chose to use a flood.
A powerful, theological difference is the polytheistic
verses monotheistic foundations of the stories. The flood came because Enlil
was angry at Ea at some point during their shared stay at Shurippak and decided
to destroy mankind. This is not the case in the Genesis account. God does not
have a round table discussion with other deities; God is the only Deity within
the biblical story.[51]
Wenham states, “The plurality of divinities creates uncertainty about the
future as far as mortals are concerned, and the pettiness of the gods’ motives
in destroying mankind contrasts starkly with the stern moral tone of the
biblical account.”[52] The
idea of continuity is rampant within the Gilgamesh Epic.[53] In
contrast, God did not dwell in the city where Noah resided because God is
transcendent within the realm He created.[54]
This contrast of continuity verses
transcendence is further viewed when the sacrifices were offered after the
flood. Gilgamesh offers up a sacrifice of seven jars consisting of various foods,
designed to provide a feast.[55]
“Significantly, Noah does not offer
up a libation. The omission points to the fact that sacrifice is not food for
God. In the Gilgamesh Epic, the destruction of mankind deprived the gods of the
food and drink offerings on which they depended to sustain their immortal
existence.”[56] The gods came to the
feast because of sweet-smelling spices in the Gilgamesh Epic with prepared food
waiting; the offering by Noah completely consumed the animals in their entirety
[tlo[o] leaving nothing for
God because God does not need sustenance to survive. “The point here is that
Noah’s first act indicates his faith that God had brought him through the
flood.”[57]
There is no idea of thanks within the Gilgamesh Epic.
Initially there
seems to be similarity with what Utnapishtim and Noah brought on board;
however, the people, the animals, and the belongings are in stark contrast as
well. “Perhaps the most significant of all the distinctive features of the
Torah account is that only Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives
enter the ark […]. Only in Genesis is the concept of a single family of man
possible; indeed, it is a major theme.”[58] Within
the Gilgamesh Epic, there is no differentiation within the animals; however,
the biblical account makes it painstakingly clear that God brought both clean
and “not clean” animals on board.[59]
Noah followed God’s strict instructions without disobeying, ultimately
demonstrating his true faith to God.
While the
Gilgamesh account seems to stress a universal flood, does the Bible do the
same?[60] The
language describing the biblical flood insists that the flood was universal. Gen.
7:11 indicates, “The two sources of water are intended to recall the ‘waters
above and below’ of 1:6-7. The Flood un-creates, and returns the earth to a
pre-creation period when there was only ‘water’ [1:2].”[61] The
term lWBm; carries
significant weight within the text. “The presence of the article [h; or h;-ta,] on all but two instances (Gen. 9:11, 45) in
the flood account (Gen. 9-11) may indicate that this mabbûl was a well-known event. All five instances of mabbûl that look forward to (6:17) or
describe the impact of the flood (7:6-7, 10, 17) are juxtaposed with a form of mayim (waters).”[62] Thus,
forty days of torrential rain as well as rising water from below created a
universal, hydrologic catastrophe.[63]
Furthermore, Gen. 6:17 carries the idea
that this flood was not a local flood; otherwise, the preparation of the ark,
the gathering of the animals, as well as the promised destruction of the entire
human race could not have occurred.[64] The
text reinforces this by twice describing the height the water achieved, “all
the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered,” and “the
mountains were covered” (7:19-20). Second, the point of the flood was to
destroy all life, not just man (as in the Gilgamesh Epic). “The waters do not
merely multiply greatly; they triumph. rbg
which occurs four times in this scene (7:18, 19, 20, 24) is a military word for
succeeding in battle.”[65]
The complete destruction of life occurs
within this same passage Wenham describes, thus the conquest of battle ends
when the last living form drowned outside the ark. “And all flesh died that moved
upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man” (7:21). Once the
flood waters recede, God makes a covenant.[66]
God promises not to destroy the world by flood (lWBmh;;
cf. Gen. 9:11); however, floods still occur. Either God is lying, or a smaller,
local flood lacks explanation within the context of the passage.
Conclusion
So, what does one do with the previous
discussion? Is there evidence of ample borrowing by the author of Genesis?
Fundamentally, the answer must be no. “Most likely, the similarities between
the biblical and ANE flood accounts derive from the fact that God brought the
flood to pass as it is described in Genesis. After the rebellion at Babel,
various flood traditions developed over time as people migrated in different
directions in the wake of the confusion of languages at Babel.”[67] This
would then explain the small number of similarities between the two stories.[68]
However, Genesis, with a later written date contains a polemic that “comes
closer to a repudiation of pagan ideas about origins, mankind, civilization,
and the flood.”[69]
Agreeably, “What
distinguishes the biblical account from others is its theological underpinnings
and the reason for the disaster [...]. What is important in Genesis is the
fidelity of Noah to God’s word and the continuation of the divine promise
designed for all future generations.”[70] The
context of judgment and the actions of a transcendent God are unique within the
pages of Genesis.[71]
The story of Gilgamesh is not about a flood, it is about a man seeking selfish
immortality; Noah’s flood is central to early Genesis and is not concerned with
immortality, but God’s divine judgment and saving grace within a fallen world.[72] Thus,
while at the surface there appears to be similarity, enough dissimilarity
exists that this demands equal attention. Ultimately, the Genesis flood
narrative refuted Ancient Near Eastern flood mythologies such as the Gilgamesh
Epic, and demonstrated God's justice and love in a lost and sinful world.
Bibliography
Blaiklock,
E. M. and R. K. Harrison, eds. The New
International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology. Grand Rapids: Regency,
1983.
Davis,
John J. Paradise to Prison: Studies in
Genesis. Salem, WI: Sheffield, 1998.
Fisher,
Eugene J. “Gilgamesh and Genesis: The Flood Story in Context.” Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 32, no. 3 (July 1, 1970): 392-403.
Foster,
Benjamin R. “Gilgamesh.” Vol. 1 of The Context of Scripture. Edited by William
W. Hallo. Boston: Brill, 2003, 458-460.
Fretheim,
Terence E. “!nx”. Vol. II of New
International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by
Willem A. VanGemeren, 203-206. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
Grisanti,
Michael A. “lWBm;.” In Vol.
II of New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. VanGemeren, 835-837.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
Hamilton,
Victor. The Book of Genesis: Chapters
1-17. Vol. 1 of NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.
Heidel,
Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old
Testament Parallels. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1971.
Longman III, Tremper. How to Read Genesis. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 2005.
Mathews,
Kenneth A. Genesis 1 – 11:26. Vol. 1
of The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996.
Merrill,
Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti. The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament.
Nashville: B&H, 2011.
Oswalt,
John N. The Bible Among the Myths: Unique
Revelation of Just Ancient Literature. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.
Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts
Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton,
1969.
________. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of
Texts and Pictures. Princeton, NC: Princeton, 2011.
Sarna,
Nahum. Genesis. Vol. 1 of The JPS
Torah Commentary. Edited by Nahum Sarna. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society, 1989.
Schaeffer,
Francis A. Genesis in Space and Time: the
Flow of Biblical History. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1972.
Walton,
John H. Genesis. Vol. 1 of New International Version Application Commentary.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
Wenham,
Gordon, J. Genesis 1-15. Vol. 1a of Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, TX: Word Books, Publisher, 1987.
[1]
For example, Gordon, J. Wenham, Genesis
1-15, vol. 1 of Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word Books, Publisher, 1987), 159-166;
referred to hereafter as “Genesis”.
[2]
E. M. Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison, eds., “Gilgamesh, Epic of” in The New International Dictionary of Biblical
Archaeology (Grand Rapids: Regent, 1983), 214.
[3]
Alexander Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and
Old Testament Parallels (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1971), 15.
[4]
Ibid., 4; Ninsun is the wife of Lugalbanda, another god.
[5]
Heidel, 18, Tablet I, Col. II, line 1; cf. Tablet IX, Col. II, line 16 (pg.
66); the brackets are meant to inform the reader of Heidel’s work of
restorations within the cuneiform text (pg. ix).
[6]
Heidel, 17; Tablet I, Col. I, lines 3-8; his height was eleven cubits and his
chest was as broad as nine spans.
[7]
Ibid., Tablet I, Col. II, lines 30-32.
[8]
Ibid., 19, Tablet I, Col. II, lines 34-35; Enkidu is the offspring of Ninurta, the
god of war.
[9]
Ibid., 32, Tablet II, specifically Col. VI, lines 15-23.
[10]
Ibid., Tablet II, Col. VI, lines 31-35; , “As one unique (among men) thy
mother, the wild cow of the enclosures, Ninsunna, did bear thee. Thy head is
exalted above (all other) men”.
[11]
Ibid., 33-49.
[12]
Ibid., 49; this story goes from tablet III-V; they return after beheading Ḫumbaba.
[13]
James B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and
Pictures (Princeton, NC:
Princeton, 2011), 50-52; Tablet VI, lines 1-79.
[14]
Ibid., 52-53, Tablet VI, lines 80-121.
[15]
Heidel, 54, lines 130-155; by now, Enkidu and Gilgamesh have become brothers
(line 156).
[16]
Ibid., Tablet VI, lines 190-Tablet VII, Col. I, lines 1-22; Before dying,
Enkidu tries to call a curse upon Gilgamesh; however, Shamash comes down from
heaven and ultimately dissuades Enkidu from cursing Gilgamesh (Tablet VII, Col.
III, lines 1-52). Col. IV records the blessing from Enkidu (lines 1-54) a
speech from Gilgamesh who fears that he shall die in disgrace instead of battle
(pgs. 58-62; lines 5-19). There is a gap of roughly fifty lines between the
blessing and the speech by Gilgamesh; however, contextually, Heidel assumes
that Gilgamesh is the speaker (cf. pg. 61). Tablet VIII, Col. I describes the death
of Enkidu and Gilgamesh’s sorrow.
[17]
Ibid., 62-64; The reason is clear, Gilgamesh states, “I am afraid of death”
(Tablet IX, Col. I, line 5a).
[18]
Ibid., 65-68; cf. Col. III, line 1-Tablet V, line 44 for the discussion with
the scorpion-man and the ensuing journey through darkness; “dense is the
darkness and there is no light; neither what lies ahead of him nor what lies
behind him does it permit him to see.”
[19]
Ibid., 68-70; cf. Col. V, line 45-Tablet X, Col. III, line 14, Old Babylonian
version; the Assyrian version takes a variation in the conversation and Siduri
has heard of Gilgamesh’s exploits and is afraid (pgs. 71-74).
[20]
Pritchard, Anthology, 62, Tablet X,
Col. III, lines 4-14.
[21]
Ibid., Tablet X, Col. IV, line 1.
[22]
Heidel, 71, Col. IV, line 6; Assyrian Version, Tablet X, Col. II, lines 29-34
describes them as stone images owned by Utnapishtim.
[23]
Ibid., 76-78, Tablet X, Col. III, lines 35-Col. IV.
[24]
Ibid., 78, Col. V, line 22; pgs. 77-79 for the entire section
[25]
Ibid., 79, Col. VI, lines 36-39.
[26]
Ibid., 80, line 7.
[27]
James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern
Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton,
1969), 93, lines 23-30; hereafter referred to as “ANET”.
[28]
Ibid., 93, lines 36-43; cf. Heidel, 81, literally, “Enlil hates Ea” (line 39).
[29]
Heidel, 81, line 42.
[30]
Ibid., 81-83; cf. Pritchard, ANET,
93, lines 56-76. Utnapishtim begins building the boat on the fifth day and is
finished on the seventh day. The shape of the boat is roughly a cube.
[31]
Pritchard, 94, lines 77-79.
[32]
Ibid., n200 discussing the shifting of the floor planks and the fact that the
deluge had not yet begun.
[33]
Ibid., lines 80-85; cf. Heidel, pgs. 83-84.
[34]
Pritchard, ANET, 94, lines 96-110; Shamash
gave Utnapishtim a set time to be ready to board, “When the leader of the storm
causes a destructive rain to rain down in the evening, enter the ship and close
thy door” (Heidel, 84).
[35]
Ibid., lines 108, 113-126, “the gods were frightened by the deluge, and,
shrinking back, they ascended to the heaven
of Anu. The gods cowered like dogs crouched against the outer wall” (lines 113-115).
[36]
Ibid., 94-5, lines 140-188.
[37]
Benjamin R. Foster, Gilgamesh, vol. 1
of The Context of Scripture, ed.
William W. Hallo (Boston: Brill, 2003), 460; cf. Pritchard, ANET, 95, lines 189-194.
[38]
Pritchard, ANET, 95-96, lines
200-217. Gilgamesh arouses from his slumber to find out that he has ‘slept’ for
seven days because Utnapishtim’s wife cooked seven wafers of different
consistency and staleness.
[39]
Ibid., 96, lines 233-276.
[40]
Heidel, 92-93, lines 289-311; Tablet XII discusses another epic tale of
Gilgamesh, where he presided over a netherworld as the main deity (see Foster’s
Introduction to the Epic in Context of
Scripture, 458).
[41]
Gordon J. Wenham, "The Coherence of the Flood Narrative." Vetus Testamentum 28 (1978): 346. See
Appendix 1 for Wenham’s list of seventeen commonalities.
[42]
John J. Davis, Paradise to Prison: Studies
in Genesis (Salem, WI: Sheffield, 1998), 131; italics added.
[43]
Victor Hamilton, The Book of Genesis:
Chapters 1-17, vol. 1 of New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 271.
[44]
Noah was a just man [qyDic; vyai
h:no] and perfect in his generations [wyt"rodoB.
hy"h" ~ymiT"], and Noah walked with God [x:no-%L,h;t.hi ~yhiloa/h'-ta,]” (v.
9). The three key phrases demonstrated that Noah's lifestyle was in contrast to
all of humanity recorded in the previous eight verses.
[45]
Eugene J. Fisher, "Gilgamesh and Genesis: The Flood Story in Context,"
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 32, no. 3
(July 1, 1970), 395.
[46]
Pritchard, ANET, 95, lines Tablet XI, lines 173-174
[47]
Terence E. Fretheim, !he, vol. II, in New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1997), 205.
[48]
Nahum Sarna, Genesis, vol. 1 of The
JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum Sarna (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society, 1989), 48-49.
[49]
Tyxiv.hi-yKi, here in the
Hiphil, conveys the idea that sin had permeated every corner of society.
[50] Ibid., 47; bold font Sarna’s.
[51]
There were five deities in the discussion in the Gilgamesh Epic: Anu, Enlil,
Ninurta, Ennugi, and Ea (Heidel, 80, Tablet XI, lines 15-19).
[52]
Wenham, Genesis, 164.
[53]
John N. Oswalt, The Bible Among the
Myths: Unique Revelation of Just Ancient Literature (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2009), 47-62.
[54]
Ibid., 65; cf. pgs. 81-84.
[55]
John H. Walton, Genesis, vol. 1 of NIVAC
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 315.
[56]
Sarna, 59; italics added for emphasis.
[57]
Hamilton, 307.
[58]
Sarna, 49; Within the Gilgamesh epic, family, friends, tradesmen, a boatman and
treasures are all brought on board. Furthermore, Ea told Utnapishtim to leave
everything behind, yet he disobeys Ea and loads his treasure of silver and
gold.
[59]
Kenneth A. Mathews, Genesis 1 – 11:26,
vol. 1 of The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996),
371. Wenham, Genesis, points out that
the author does not use the term ṭāmē, “unclean” (pg. 287). In fact, Walton
points out that the Israelite animal system of “clean” verses “unclean” is
unique among their ANE partners (Walton, 313).
[60]
Pritchard, Anthology, 67,
lines 138-139.
[61]
Hamilton, 291.
[62]
Michael A. Grisanti, “lWBm;,”
in vol. II of New International
Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 835-836.
[63]
The Gilgamesh Epic record explains that rain lasted for merely seven days.
[64]
Within the biblical account, there is no test launch of the ark. The text
demonstrates God’s foreknowledge and proper planning mitigates any accidents or
bad placement of weight as was necessary within the Gilgamesh epic.
[65]
Wenham, Genesis, 182; cf. Francis Schaeffer,
Genesis in Space and Time: the Flow of
Biblical History (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 133.
[66]
This is clearly lacking from the Gilgamesh Epic; the commands against murder
and for replenishing the earth are also lacking.
[67] Eugene H., Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A.
Grisanti, The World and the Word: An
Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: B&H, 2011), 59; cf.
Sarna, pgs. 48-49.
[68]
See Appendix I.
[69]
Mathews, 89.
[70]
Ibid., 100-101; one should read the entire section on pages 98-101 for a more
thorough treatment of the refutation of the theory that Genesis borrowed from
ANE accounts.
[71]
Tremper Longman III, How to Read Genesis
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005), 87.
[72]
Mathews, 87; cf. Wenham, Genesis, 165;
cf. Davis, 132.
No comments:
Post a Comment