FLOODS IN "HOLY BIBLE" & "GILGAMESH".   Term Paper ID:26244 Buy This Paper

Essay Subject: Compares causes & religious significance of world-destroying floods in Old Testament & ancient heroic epic.... More...

10 Pages / 2250 Words 5 sources, 78 Citations, MLA Format $40.00 More Papers on This Topic

Paper Abstract: Compares causes & religious significance of world-destroying floods in Old Testament & ancient heroic epic. Paper Introduction: The similarities between the accounts of a world-destroying flood in the Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh and the story of Noah and the flood in Genesis 6-8 are very remarkable. The degree of similarity is so strong that it has frequently been suggested that the Biblical account owes its origin to the overall Babylonian tradition--which was written down earlier. But the question of precedence is nearly impossible to resolve since, though the composition of the Babylonian account may antedate that of the Bible, there is no way of ascertaining the age of the two accounts prior to the time at which they were given written form. In addition to the Gilgamesh, there are several other ancient middle-eastern literary accounts of a great deluge. These tales offer slightly weaker examples of correspondence with the Biblical account. As a group they certainly point to the Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. The"destruction" of the human race is the purpose given by the God who causedthe flood but there is no trace of a reason given for this destruction--though there is a clear indication by the god who speaks that he wisheshumanity to make a new start in their worship of the gods (Handcock 2 ).The storm is said to rage "for seven days, for seven nights" and theprincipal figure, Ziusudu, emerges from a closed boat and offers sacrificesto the gods (Handcock 21). The families of Ham, Shem, and Japheth will be the forebearsof all of humanity from that point on and the tracing of history throughtheir descendants is an important result of the flood account's veryspecific naming of these men. In this respect itsmonotheism and sense of purpose differentiates it from all the others. 7:19-21). 11:155-158; Gen. Yet thisis, it seems, precisely the sort of misshapen detail that shows how theoriginal story of Noah may have undergone transformation into thepolytheistic setting of Babylonian religion. At last the birds did not return (Gil. 11:53; Gen. Judging only by the very high number of points on which the twoaccounts are all but identical (and the similarity of the structures of thestories) it is not at all surprising that a number of people hold that theBible episode derives from the flood legends of the Babylonian tradition.The Gilgamesh epic developed over a period of at least 1,3 years prior tobeing written down (c. 7:1-3). It is mentioned that the mountains are coveredby the waters of the deluge (Gil. 6:19-2 ) and they obey theorders (Gil. The Gilgamesh epic as it is known today was discovered byarchaeologists on twelve large tablets in Nineveh, the later capital of theAssyrian empire, in the ruins of a temple library and the palace library ofAshurbanipal (668- c. Utnapishtim and Noah are warned of the imminentdestruction of the world (Gil. In brief, one of the gods tellsUtnapishtim of the impending flood which the gods have decided will destroyeveryone on earth. 8:9). 7:14-24). The importance of the existence of the Nippurtablet is that it demonstrates that the flood account preceded by centuriesthe composition of the Gilgamesh epic. Though the similarities seem to cease at thispoint, it is interesting to note that in the Gilgamesh, the great goddessdecides that the god (Enlil) who had caused the flood went too far indestroying mankind and had acted "without reflection" (Gil. Howard F. Thus what is another hopeful sign in the Bible is a merephysical sensation in Gilgamesh. 27 B. C. 11:86-88; Gen. 11:129-131; Gen. Onleaving the ark Utnapishtim makes an offering to the gods. Inany literary analysis intention is a primary concern. The purposes forwhich the work was written are the source of the author's choice of words,events to be depicted, and literary structures. These tales offer slightly weaker examples ofcorrespondence with the Biblical account. As a group they certainly pointto the factuality of the flood, but, as with the Gilgamesh, the time framefor the oral and written origins of these works is very difficult todetermine. And it is the notion of hope that entersinto another difference in the details of the two stories. 11:24-31; Gen. 7 B.C..) in the form found at Nineveh, and thereis no physical evidence of earlier written versions of the Noah story(written c. 6:1 to be "Shem, Ham, and Japheth". 6:14), constructed several decks withinthe arks--six for Utnapishtim and three for Noah (Gil. 11:76). Two of the principal differences speak tothe Bible story's focus on the idea of a second start for earthly creation. The other principal difference between the Gilgamesh and the Biblicalaccounts is that the Babylonian epic includes the story as an episode thatis set apart from the main narrative and has no serious implications forthe hero. The degree of similarity is so strongthat it has frequently been suggested that the Biblical account owes itsorigin to the overall Babylonian tradition--which was written down earlier. 11:1 9; Gen. 11:16 -161).And in Genesis 8:21 "the Lord smelled the pleasing odor". Butthe family members taken aboard by Noah are very specifically designated as"Your sons, your wife, and your son's wives" (Gen. Though it is not entirelyclear it also appears that Utnapishtim took a larger group of relatives onboard since the text reads "all my family and relations" (Gil. Ed. Thisangers the great goddess who "lifted up the great jewels" of her necklaceand swore by them that she would "remember these days and shall not forget[them] ever" (Gil. 11:81-2) and took his workmen as well (Gil. 11:84). 6:22). Ed. These points are important not only because they support the theme ofGod's dual purpose in bringing about the flood--punishment and regeneration--but because they contrast so sharply with the version of the flood inGilgamesh. Vos. C.). Onceinside Utnapishtim and Noah were told to seal the openings of their arks(Gil. (Handcock 7). The first known Babylonian version is the Sumerian-languagetablet found at Nippur. All the beasts went aboard the two arks (Gil.11:85; Gen. Works CitedFree, Joseph P., and Howard F. ed. 11:85). This re-creation of humanitythrough the agency of Noah, "the patriarch and progenitor of thegenerations [after] the flood," makes it clear that the flood had a purposeand that it was a demonstration of God's intimate involvement in humanhistory and God's insistence that humanity adhere to divine law (Ryan andPitman 246). Archaeology and Bible History. The two men wait for a designated period--sevendays in the Babylonian myth and 4 days in the Bible (Gil. In the Gilgamesh the gods "smelled the sweetsavor [and] gathered like flies over the sacrificer" (Gil. The basic story consists of the king'squest for immortality. The return ofthe dove bearing the olive leaf was such a sign of hope (Gen. In thetext of the eleventh tablet of the Ninevite recension Utnapishtim tellsGilgamesh the story of the flood from which he and the passengers on hisark emerged as the only survivors. 8:11). 8:9). Utnapishtim's arktook only seven days to build, but the length of time Noah spent on the arkis not recorded (Gil. In view of the great number of similarities between accounts it isessential, therefore, to assess the flood stories in terms of the meaningsand purposes inherent in the stories. Noah's Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event That Changed History. 11:76; Gen. 8:6) and Utnapishtim and Noah open the arks to find they have landedon the tops of mountains--Nisir for Utnapishtim and Ararat for Noah (Gil.11:14 -144; Gen. He is displeased by human beingswho, in some recensions of the Babylonian legend, make too much noise anddo not let him sleep. A point-by-point comparison of the texts of Tablet 11 of theGilgamesh epic and Genesis 6-8 will demonstrate the principal instances ofsimilarity between the two accounts, along with a few of the minorvariations in facts. But,since the tablets by which we know the epic date only to the seventhcentury B. But the question of precedence is nearly impossible to resolve since,though the composition of the Babylonian account may antedate that of theBible, there is no way of ascertaining the age of the two accounts prior tothe time at which they were given written form. 8:4). 11:146) and a raven (Gen. Metzger. This tablet is not dated but "on paleographicalgrounds" it has been assigned to the latter half of the first Babyloniandynasty, no later than c. New York: Oxford UP, 1965.Ryan, William, and Walter Pitman. C. The failure of humanity to follow the laws of God resulted in theirdestruction but the world will be given a chance to start over by means ofwhatever and whomever God chooses to preserve on the ark. 11:135;Gen. Thusregeneration and a fresh start for the world play absolutely no part in theBabylonian version of the flood. It is at thispoint that both the Babylonian's great goddess (Ishtar) and God in theBible decide that this will not happen again. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992.Handcock, Percy, ed. 8:7).After the birds fail to return Utnapishtim and Noah leave their arks, withall the animals and people (Gil. The Sumerian version is the onlyaccount that connects the flood to a creation myth, which tends to make itappear to be a re-creation story. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1998. Herbert G. 11:168). In some respects theircargoes were the same. 11:155; Gen. 6:15). Such asociety would not comprehend the Hebrews' one God who incorporatedeverything into Himself and could, therefore, be both punishing andmerciful. 11:6 ; Gen. Babylonian Flood Stories. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. In Genesis 7:8, forexample, the text reads, "Of clean animals, of animals that are not clean,and of birds, and of everything that creeps on the ground, two and two,male and female, went into the ark with Noah, as God had commanded Noah".But, while Utnapishtim only says that he "caused the game of the field[and] the beasts of the field" to board (Gil. 6:14-21) in the form oflarge cubes (Gil. 6:6-7, 13), and both arecommanded to build their arks (Gil. When they were given the order to board their arks both Utnapishtimand Noah obeyed (Gil. In the Gilgameshnarrative the reaction of the gods is also given and the gods, frightenedby the deluge, fled and "cowered like dogs in heaven" (Gil. Yet, while it is easy enough to account for the similarities anddemonstrate that it is just as likely that the Bible version preceded theBabylonian recensions as the other way around, it is more difficult toaccount, at least in terms of the immediate texts, for what makes the Bibleversion fundamentally different from the others. The Biblical account is far more specific about thenature of the command to take the animals on board. In theNoahic covenant God "laid down the principals for the continuation of lifeon earth" and the importance of the flood, rather than being a merecapricious action as in the Babylonian legends, is firmly established bythis covenant (Free and Vos 4 ). Thehideously hovering gods of the Gilgamesh display a dependence on mankind'sofferings, and had not "been fed for some weeks," as Heidel notes (256).But, just as Ishtar's necklace may be a weak polytheistic rendering of thenotion of the covenant, the gods' reaction to Utnapishtim's sacrifice mayrepresent a misunderstanding of God's pleasure in Noah's sacrifice. In addition to theGilgamesh, there are several other ancient middle-eastern literary accountsof a great deluge. Vos. May and Bruce M. They almost never offer indications of meaning--exceptwhere the Bible version varies from the Babylonian version in what mightseem to be small, incidental ways. Although the Gilgamesh epic contains the most extensive and mostfamous of the Babylonian versions of the flood myth it is a later recensionof the story. In the epic the god Enlil is responsible for the flood, thoughthe other gods agree to it by keeping it secret from humanity (with theexception of Ea, who tells Utnapishtim). The split between Enlil andIshtar may reflect the tendency of a polytheistic society to see differentgods as possessors of different aspects and types of behavior. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1946.Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. it is clear that the various episodes, including the floodstory, "did not spring into existence at the time of our poem but must havebeen current long before they were compiled and woven together to form outepic" (Heidel 15). Such analysis points up the uniquecharacteristics of the Biblical account and indicates that the otherversions were accounts of an event that merely employed local polytheisticmyth as a framework while the Hebrew account of the Flood focused on divinepurpose and the meanings the flood was intended to have for humanity. The thirdtime Utnapishtim sent out a raven and the fourth time Noah sent out thedove again. This makes it theearliest known example of a flood story. God, of course, decides thata covenant will be established with humanity "that never again shall allflesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be aflood to destroy the earth" (Gen. But if Enlil's flood could be called a punishment itis not one intended to offer anyone a lesson. 11:14-23; Gen. The flood ceases (Gil. It is apparent in Genesis 6-8 that theflood had meaning, but this is reconfirmed by the form of the divinecommands that precede the repopulation of the earth. 6:21). New York: Macmillan, 1921.Heidel, Alexander. 11:145; Gen.8:6) and then send out birds--a dove (Gil. 11:27-28; Gen. In the Bible account a third bird (a dove) is sent outand returns carrying "in her mouth a freshly plucked olive leaf; so Noahknew that the waters had subsided from the earth" (Gen. Thus, in analyzing the similarities and variations between theGilgamesh and Genesis 6-8, it is important to begin with the immensedifference in the apparent purpose of the Gilgamesh flood account and theBible's story of Noah. 7:7-8). C. 8:15-19) and offer sacrifices(Gil. 11:115). The legends surrounding him grew over the centuriesinto a Sumerian tradition which was later "utilized by the BabylonianSemites in the production of their great national epic" (Heidel 14). Thelength of the storm is much greater in the Bible, six days and six nightsin the Gilgamesh (Gil. They then send out a swallow (Utnapishtim) andanother dove (Noah) (Gil. 2 B. But all life on earth was destroyed according to bothnarratives (Gil. In the Bible, however, the floodcomes at the center of Noah's story and is followed by the consequences itbrings about. Through his specialrelationship with Noah--the only morally sound individual in creation--Godarranges the repopulation of the earth. 7:13-16), as well as the families of Utnapishtim and Noah (Gil.11:83-84; Gen. 11:93; Gen. Utnapishtim is told to build an ark, to stock it withfood and animals, and when the storm ceases, after seven days and nights,Utnapishtim finds he has landed on a mountain and sends out a series ofbirds to discover whether it is possible to descend to dry land again. 6:18) and these sonsare, of course, known from Gen. Descriptions of the Flood follow at this point in both accounts (Gil.11:96-128; Gen. The next section of the epic immediately reverts to the story ofGilgamesh and leaves the flood behind. The historical Gilgamesh, for example, was a Babylonian king wholived c. In assessing the importance of the relationship among thesevarious flood accounts, however, the singular difference that emerges isthe theological basis of the Biblical account. 8:8) which return as well (Gil.11:15 ; Gen. But there is also no doubt that the Noah story isvery ancient and nothing to contradict the claim that its telling longpreceded the recounting of the Gilgamesh legend or the other Babylonianflood stories. 7:12). 9:11) God sets the rainbow in the cloudsas a sign of this promise. They are told to take all livingthings aboard the arks (Gil. 633 B. As Ryan and Pitman have said, the flood accountsfrom the Mesopotamian regions seem to be primarily recountings of a greatnatural disaster that was, however, "clearly perceived as a traumaticdivide in human history" (246). Rev. and exp. 11:154-155; Gen. 11:163, 165). 8:7).But the birds return because they are unable to find places to land (Gil.11:146-148; Gen. In Genesis 9 God establishes the covenant with Noah. There is more similarity in these twopromises and their brightly colored heavenly signs than, at first seemsapparent, although Heidel, and others, do not accept this parallel since itwas not Ishtar but Enlil who was the author of the flood (259). The true import of these variations,however, is very significant. The tendency of oral traditions tocirculate for many centuries prior to being preserved in written formdemonstrates the flexibility that must be maintained when judging the ageof stories in middle-eastern literature, especially when looking at them interms of influence. Yet it is noteworthy thatthe overwhelming majority of the similarities between the two accounts arematters of fact. TheBiblical version, while it "possesses the same basic framework as itMesopotamian counterparts" has a clearer message and casts the entireepisode as a demonstration of the fact that "there is only one God, who isalmighty, purposeful, and good" (Ryan and Pitman 246). Rev. standard version. 11:149; Gen. Yet while all these versions are "coloredsomewhat by local tradition" the deluge "seems to be a natural event causedby godly caprice" with only a "rather feeble" rationale given for theinfliction of all this damage on the world (Ryan and Pitman 246). But the very brief text does not, inother ways, bear extensive similarity to the Biblical account. 11:85), he also says that heloaded "Whatever I had of silver [and] Whatever I had of gold" (Gil. 8:2 ). 8:11) and thewhole tone of the acceptance of the offering by God is very different. The similarities between the accounts of a world-destroying flood inthe Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh and the story of Noah and the flood inGenesis 6-8 are very remarkable. Thelegends of Gilgamesh were probably first compiled around 2 B. Utnapishtim and Noah both sealed thearks with pitch (Gil. 8:2-3). 11:3 ; Gen. In the course of his search he consults a relativenamed Utnapishtim who had been granted immortality by the gods. 11:33-85; Gen. Ratherthan finding sweetness in the actual smell of meat (the very literal notionof the Babylonian flood story), God finds pleasure in the fact that man ispaying heed to Him, this, in itself, bodes well for the second start He hasgiven the world. 11:127-128) as opposed to 4 days and nights in theBible (Gen. 6:16),and loaded supplies of food (Gil. 9 B.C.). It is his intention that noone be saved and he is angry when he discovers what Ea has done. 7:16). C., asinternal evidence related to the names of the deities indicates. Thus theexplicitness of the Bible account regarding the numbers and range ofanimals taken onto the ark (which is repeated several times) and theprecise delimitation of the persons on the ark point toward this idea ofrepopulation. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or We can write a Custom Essay just for you.