Which is older Genesis, Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerians?

[pm2222]

Ok does this seem correct…i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths. Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways. My question is which one came first? There seems to have obviously been a massive flood if there are many ancient traditions with floods in them. But is it true that the stories in Genesis were passed down orally for many many years, and some people twisted these stories and in turn formed creation stories such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Sumerian beliefs about creation? And then Moses came and corrected the people who had changed the stories and the true creation account was written down and is inspired? Please let me know if this sounds right or if u disagree or have anything to add thanks!

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Ok does this seem correct…i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths. Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways. My question is which one came first? There seems to have obviously been a massive flood if there are many ancient traditions with floods in them. But is it true that the stories in Genesis were passed down orally for many many years, and some people twisted these stories and in turn formed creation stories such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Sumerian beliefs about creation? And then Moses came and corrected the people who had changed the stories and the true creation account was written down and is inspired? Please let me know if this sounds right or if u disagree or have anything to add thanks!

A few observations:

1. I think it’s pretty certain that, in terms of written works, the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Sumerian creation myths are older than Genesis. I wouldn’t say they are “copies” but there are some striking similarities.
2. Yes, all kinds of cultures have flood myths. Just for fun, Google “flood myth” and see what comes up.
3. Were the flood and creation myths passed down orally? Impossible to say for sure. What evidence would there be of this? Obviously, Genesis 1 wasn’t an eyewitness account so not exactly sure how that would have worked anyway. Some Christians believe the stories were divinely revealed to Moses–but that’s up to you.
4. I think the creation stories are more similar in that they both describe people being formed out of clay rather than the bit about the seven tablets. And you’re right, the flood/ark story in the Epic of Gilgamesh is far more similar (imo) than are the creation stories, or the flood/ark story of Atrahasis. There are of course other ancient Near Eastern parallels in the Bible, such as the similarities between the birth stories of Sargon and Moses, just to give one example.

If you’re really interested in this topic, there are a number of books that show the parallels between other ancient Near Eastern cultures and the Bible, such as Old Testament Parallels.

 

[buffalo]

The sources of Genesis are older - Giglamesh is a corruption.

 

[grannymh]

Ok does this seem correct…i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths. Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways. My question is which one came first? There seems to have obviously been a massive flood if there are many ancient traditions with floods in them.** But is it true that the stories in Genesis were passed down orally for many many years, and some people twisted these stories and in turn formed creation stories such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Sumerian beliefs about creation?** And then Moses came and corrected the people who had changed the stories and the true creation account was written down and is inspired? Please let me know if this sounds right or if u disagree or have anything to add thanks!

Emphasis mine.

Currently, my main interest is the beginning of human history in the first three chapters of Genesis. A few things seem obvious*.* Adam and Eve, as responsible parents, instructed their children correctly regarding the relationship between God and the humans He created. As generations multiplied and there was widespread migration, some generations were able to preserve these original truths. Eventually, under God’s guidance, these truths were put into written form.

Obviously, what is in bold above would have happened in some cases, because just like today, rebellion against the older generation occurred. My guess is that in some cases, the original truths were discarded. This meant that some peoples started from scratch to understand the world and their place in it. Because a sense of the supernatural has always been part of human nature, it is possible that some peoples could reason out a relationship between the supernatural and natural.

Eventually, in order to preserve the original truths, the first three chapters of Genesis were composed under the inspiration of God, the Originator of truth. Thus, the purpose of these three chapters is to present God’s Divine Revelation.

Personally, in my humble opinion, it does not make a whole lot of difference which account of creation was put into a permanent record first because all people are descended from Adam and Eve. What makes a real difference is which account is in accord with the real events.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

In my understanding the Jews lived among the Sumerians in the early days. Naturally they would have the same stories about creation. However, what are you finding in the Bible that relates to the Gilgamesh story, other than the flood? Actually, the Greeks took this story and made up the story of Heracles out of it (Hercules in the Roman myths).

And what makes you believe the flood was a myth? Certainly there must have been a great flood that seem to cover all the known land at one time.

 

[Contarini]

Ok does this seem correct…i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths.

“Copy” is certainly the wrong word. There are significant differences. There are enough similarities that there’s clearly some kind of historical/literary relationship, but there are several ways of understanding this. I’ll list them from most conservative to most liberal:

1. The Biblical story is a record of original, uncorrupted tradition, of which the Sumerian (or better, Babylonian) version is the corrupted version.
2. Abraham learned the Babylonian version as a pagan in Ur and Harran, but either he or his descendants, under divine guidance, corrected the story and passed it on. This could have involved a very long process of retelling.
3. Ancient Hebrews derived their creation story originally not directly from Babylonia but from their Canaanite neighbors, who had creation myths that were very similar (I don’t think we have parallels in Canaanite literature that are as close as the Babylonian ones, but I also don’t think that we have more than a fraction of Canaanite literature).
4. Jewish scribes during or after the Exile engaged in a deliberate monotheistic revision/critique of the myths current among their Babylonian overlords.

I myself would lean toward 2, with an emphasis on the idea that the process of revision was very slow and gradual (not that God zapped Abraham’s brain with the “correct” version, but that as ancient Hebrews told and retold creation stories around their campfires, they gradually shaped those stories in a way that accorded better with God’s revelation of Himself to them). I think 1–the idea that the Hebrews never “corrupted” the creation story at all–is highly unlikely given the Biblical account of the origins of Abraham. But I don’t think any of them are contrary to the Christian faith–even 4.

Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways. My question is which one came first?

Well, it’s highly unlikely that Genesis existed in anything like its present form until centuries after the Babylonian myths in question were written down on clay tablets. It is of course possible that the Biblical version was passed down for thousands and thousands of years in an uncorrupted oral form, but I find this unlikely. You can find on the Web an article called the “Toledoths of Genesis” which suggests that the early parts of Genesis were originally written on clay tablets, but that seems highly fanciful to me.

I think that the best way to understand the relationship is to see the Biblical account as a theological critique of the Babylonian myths. Whether this is the result of long telling and retelling over centuries (the view I’d tend to favor), or of a self-conscious literary choice by scribes during or after the Exile (the view favored by most scholars today, I think), may not matter that much.

And then Moses came and corrected the people who had changed the stories and the true creation account was written down and is inspired?

I do not find the Mosaic theory of authorship (of the Torah as a whole or Genesis in particular) to be at all convincing, though I recognize that it has a long tradition behind it in both Judaism and Christianity.

Edwin

 

[MorningSong51]

i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths. Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways.

A Myth,although in popular parlance the word “myth”, is sometimes used as “falsehood,” in religious studies the word is employed to characterize a kind of ancient narrative that describes events in a time-before-time or some ancient, originating moment. Myths are sacred narratives that a culture tells in order to answer the most fundamental questions of life: Who are we? Why are we hear? Where are we going?

Apocrypha - (The Apocrypha refer to texts which are left out of officially sanctioned versions (‘canon’) of the Bible. ) The term apocrypha is used with various meanings, including “hidden”, “esoteric”, “spurious”, “of questionable authenticity”, ancient Chinese “revealed texts and objects” and “Christian texts that are not canonical”. The word is originally Greek (ἀπόκρυφα) and means “those hidden away”. Specifically, ἀπόκρυφα is the neuter plural of ἀπόκρυφος, an adjective related to the verb ἀποκρύπτω [infinitive: ἀποκρύπτειν] (apocriptein), “to hide something away.” The general term is usually applied to the books that the Protestant Christian Church considered useful but not divinely inspired.

Pseudepigrapha are falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded; a work, simply, “whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past.”[1] The word “pseudepigrapha” (from the Greek: ψευδής, pseudēs, “false” and ἐπιγραφή, epigraphē, “inscription”; see the related epigraphy) is the plural of “pseudepigraphon” (sometimes Latinized as “pseudepigraphum”); the Anglicized forms “pseudepigraph” and “pseudepigraphs” are also used.

Which would you say is the more reliable - Genesis or the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths? and Genesis might “not” have been written later - but it is considered (orally) the oldest account, the book (just) was written down, soon enough. Some books were left out of certain religious bibles because they were not viewed ( or considered) divinely inspired (Deuterocanonical books) - however, they are seen in Catholic and Orthodox bibles. However, Genesis is not one of them. The Jewish bible, list it as the Bereshit, beginnings. So all three religions (Christian, Jewish and Muslims) have this book as an authenticated account - and divinely inspired.

One note:

One clue lies in linguistics: the term Eden, or Edin, appears first in Sumer, the Mesopotamian region that produced the world’s first written language. This was in the third millennium B.C., more than three thousand years after the rise of the Ubaid culture. In Sumerian the word “Eden” meant simply “fertile plain.” The word “Adam” also existed in cuneiform, meaning something like “settlement on the plain.” Although both words were set down first in Sumerian,** along with place names like Ur and Uruk, they are not Sumerian in origin. **

They are older. A brilliant Assyriologist named Benno Landsberger advanced the theory in 1943 that these names were all linguistic remnants of a pre-Sumerian people who had already named rivers, cities-and even some specific trades like potter anti coppersmith-before the Sumerians appeared.

Another thought:

From Glenn Miller’s page on the Flood narratives in Genesis and elsewhere:

“It is safe to conclude that the parallels between the biblical account of the Flood and the Mesopotamian stories, being so numerous and detailed, are much more than the result of mere coincidence. Yet it cannot be claimed that any version presently known is the direct source of the biblical narrative, for the latter has points of contact with each version while it also contains items independent of them all.” (JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, Sarna)

“However, it has yet to be shown that there was borrowing, even indirectly. Differences between the Babylonian and the Hebrew traditions can be found in factual details of the Flood narrative (form of the Ark; duration of the Flood, the identity of the birds and their dispatch) and are most obvious in the ethical and religious concepts of the whole of each composition. All who suspect or suggest borrowing by the Hebrews are compelled to admit large-scale revision, alteration, and reinterpretation in a fashion that cannot be substantiated for any other composition from the ancient Near East or in any other Hebrew writing. If there was borrowing then it can have extended only as far as the “historical” framework, and not included intention or interpretation.” (“I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood”: Ancient Near Eastern, Literary, and Linguistic Approaches to Genesis 1-11, Richard Hess and David Tsumura (eds.), Eisenbrauns: 1994.)

“…it is obvious that the differences are too great to encourage belief in direct connection between Atra-hasis and Genesis, but just as obviously there is some kind of involvement in the historical traditions generally of the two peoples.” (Atra-Hasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood. W.G. Lambert and A.R. Millard. Eisenbrauns:1999 reprint of 1969 OUP.)

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The story of Gilgamesh revolves around a relationship between Gilgamesh and his close male companion, Enkidu. Enkidu is a wild man created by the gods as Gilgamesh’s equal to distract him from oppressing the citizens of Uruk. Together they undertake dangerous quests that incur the displeasure of the gods. Firstly, they journey to the Cedar Mountain to defeat Humbaba, its monstrous guardian. Later they kill the Bull of Heaven that the goddess Ishtar has sent to punish Gilgamesh for spurning her advances.

The latter part of the epic focuses on Gilgamesh’s distressed reaction to Enkidu’s death, which takes the form of a quest for immortality. Gilgamesh attempts to learn the secret of eternal life by undertaking a long and perilous journey to meet the immortal flood hero, Utnapishtim. Ultimately the poignant words addressed to Gilgamesh in the midst of his quest foreshadow the end result: “The life that you are seeking you will never find. When the gods created man they allotted to him death, but life they retained in their own keeping.” Gilgamesh, however, was celebrated by posterity for his building achievements, and for bringing back long-lost cultic knowledge to Uruk as a result of his meeting with Utnapishtim. The story is widely read in translation, and the protagonist, Gilgamesh, has become an icon of popular culture.

How is this story like Genesis???

 

[buffalo]

Let’s look at a couple of the Giglamesh vs Bible points:

1. Size of ark

Bible - 450x75x45
Gig - 200x200x200 - ( a cube? probably not seaworthy)

1. How did deity react to flood?

Bible - God is in control
Gig - gods ran away from waters

1. How long did it rain?

Bible - 40 days
Gig - 7 days

1. What was the roof made from?

Bible - wood
Gig - slate

1. Who made the decision to flood?

Bible - God
Gig council of gods

1. What happened after the flood?

Bible - God promised to destroy humanity by a flood ever again
Gig - gods quarrel with each other, god Ea lies to Enlil. Utnapishtim and wife given immortality like the gods

Bible - God tells Noah and his family to procreate
Gig - Ea and Mami created 14 human beings to procreate

1. What was the reason for the flood?

Bible - people were wicked
Gig - people were nosiy

Bible - God is sorry He made men because of their wickedness
Gig - gods could not sleep

1. When told about impending flood

Bible - Noah warned his neighbors
Gig - Told by Ea to lie to neighbors so that they would help build the ark

How was the ark launched?

Bible - by flood
Gig - pushed to the river

How long did flood last?

Bible - 370 days
Gig - 14 days

Giglamesh is a corruption of the Hebrew account.

 

[Contarini]

The story of Gilgamesh revolves around a relationship between Gilgamesh and his close male companion, Enkidu. Enkidu is a wild man created by the gods as Gilgamesh’s equal to distract him from oppressing the citizens of Uruk. Together they undertake dangerous quests that incur the displeasure of the gods. Firstly, they journey to the Cedar Mountain to defeat Humbaba, its monstrous guardian. Later they kill the Bull of Heaven that the goddess Ishtar has sent to punish Gilgamesh for spurning her advances.

The latter part of the epic focuses on Gilgamesh’s distressed reaction to Enkidu’s death, which takes the form of a quest for immortality. Gilgamesh attempts to learn the secret of eternal life by undertaking a long and perilous journey to meet the immortal flood hero, Utnapishtim. Ultimately the poignant words addressed to Gilgamesh in the midst of his quest foreshadow the end result: “The life that you are seeking you will never find. When the gods created man they allotted to him death, but life they retained in their own keeping.” Gilgamesh, however, was celebrated by posterity for his building achievements, and for bringing back long-lost cultic knowledge to Uruk as a result of his meeting with Utnapishtim. The story is widely read in translation, and the protagonist, Gilgamesh, has become an icon of popular culture.

How is this story like Genesis???

Not the story as a whole but Utnapishtim’s backstory, which is a small part of the larger epic.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Giglamesh is a corruption of the Hebrew account.

You haven’t explained how these specific points support your conclusion. I can see some of them, like the relatively more realistic details of the Biblical story. But I’d like to see you flesh out the argument.

Edwin

 

[buffalo]

You haven’t explained how these specific points support your conclusion. I can see some of them, like the relatively more realistic details of the Biblical story. But I’d like to see you flesh out the argument.

Edwin

I thought it would be obvious.

First off, which is more reasonable? The ark or a cube? Start there. Then work your way down.

At each point see if the other looks like a subset that has lost information.

 

[garysibio]

Ok does this seem correct…i have constantly heard people saying that the book of Genesis is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh and Sumerian myths. Even in my history textbook for school it says that the seven days of creation from the book of Genesis came from Sumerian myths. When i read the sumerian creation accounts( or a summary of them) from the seven stone tablets, it seems like there is not to much similarity between them. The flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh is similar to the flood in Genesis in more ways. My question is which one came first? There seems to have obviously been a massive flood if there are many ancient traditions with floods in them. But is it true that the stories in Genesis were passed down orally for many many years, and some people twisted these stories and in turn formed creation stories such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Sumerian beliefs about creation? And then Moses came and corrected the people who had changed the stories and the true creation account was written down and is inspired? Please let me know if this sounds right or if u disagree or have anything to add thanks!

Genesis is the original but was passed along orally. Gilgamesh came later but was written down earlier than Genesis.

The evidence is fairly simple. Accounts such as this tend to get more and more exaggerated over time. In Genesis the early people lived 800-900 years; in Gilgamesh they lived to be 36,000 years old.

In Genesis the ark was essentially a floating box. There was no ability to navigate. The equivalent in Gilgamesh could be steered. It’s technology was significantly more advanced. It must be of later origin.

 

[Vladd]

You haven’t explained how these specific points support your conclusion. I can see some of them, like the relatively more realistic details of the Biblical story. But I’d like to see you flesh out the argument.

Edwin

Me too, the gilgamesh story that is told in clay tablets is in the British museum and is 10,000 years old so that would make it older than the bible.

 

[Vladd]

Genesis is the original but was passed along orally. Gilgamesh came later but was written down earlier than Genesis.

The evidence is fairly simple. Accounts such as this tend to get more and more exaggerated over time. In Genesis the early people lived 800-900 years; in Gilgamesh they lived to be 36,000 years old.

In Genesis the ark was essentially a floating box. There was no ability to navigate. The equivalent in Gilgamesh could be steered. It’s technology was significantly more advanced. It must be of later origin.

Well that’s a good point but however if you have studie the Sumerian belief they actually believed these gods were alien being , not like ET but advanced beings in the form of humans, they even have drawing of crafts in the air .Having said that and if that’s the case I would think one of these advanced beings could make a steering wheel for the ship, wouldn’t you think? To add to this they also have drawings of these beings with oxygen mask on, very interesting for a people that are ancient, the real question I wonder is how did they have such ideas back then, not to mention pyramids in exact line with the solar system and on all 4 corners of the earth . Gilgamesh is in fact older, archeologist have tested the age so I would just guess since they were more advanced they must of had some help from someone or thing smarter, just my take in it. However you do have a very interesting point.

 

[Dan_Daly]

It’s technology was significantly more advanced. It must be of later origin.

Why?

One doesn’t have to look far to see cases where cultures have declined technologically- Egypt, Rome,…

Especially in the case of a worldwide flood, followed by a confusion of languages, it would be surprising if for some time earlier people weren’t more technologically advanced.

Pax

 

[Dan_Daly]

This is relevant to the OP’s question. From the Pontifical Biblical Commission’s findings on Genesis:

Question II: Whether, when the nature and historical form of the Book of Genesis does not oppose, because of the peculiar connections of the three first chapters with each other and with the following chapters, because of the manifold testimony of the Old and New Testaments; because of the almost unanimous opinion of the Holy Fathers, and because of the traditional sense which, transmitted from the Israelite people, the Church always held, it can be taught that the three aforesaid chapters of Genesis do not contain the stories of events which really happened, that is, which correspond with objective reality and historical truth; but are either accounts celebrated in fable drawn from the mythologies and cosmogonies of ancient peoples and adapted by a holy writer to monotheistic doctrine, after expurgating any error of polytheism; or allegories and symbols, devoid of a basis of objective reality, set forth under the guise of history to inculcate religious and philosophical truths; or, finally, legends, historical in part and fictitious in part, composed freely for the instruction and edification of souls? – Reply: In the negative to both parts.

Pope Saint Pius X made this particular finding and others part of the ordinary magesterium and binding on all Catholics with Praestantia Scripturae.

Pax

 

[TarkanAttila]

Me too, the gilgamesh story that is told in clay tablets is in the British museum and is 10,000 years old so that would make it older than the bible.

10,000? Kids and their history these days…

Civilization didn’t even begin until around 4000 BC!

And according to Wikipedia (it’s cited), the oldest tablets known were found to have been made c. 2100-2000 BC. About a hundred years before Abraham would have even been born.

 

[Vladd]

10,000? Kids and their history these days…

Civilization didn’t even begin until around 4000 BC!

And according to Wikipedia (it’s cited), the oldest tablets known were found to have been made c. 2100-2000 BC. About a hundred years before Abraham would have even been born.

Kids? Well archeologist say different , 4000 years ago were the Hindus the archeologist etc say the tablets are 10,000 years old and the tablets are in the museum. Wikipedia is not a reliable source if info, any goober can get on there and state things . One can get on there and find many contradictions and arguments on one single subject so to my knowledge I would say something like that is not creditable. However it’s a good read I guess. Thank you for the effort though , I’m still not convinced but for some reason I was lead here so I’m open to all possibilities .

 

[Dan_Daly]

Many around here, including myself think the earth (and the universe) are about 6000 years old. Needless to say, I am skeptical of the 10000 year old dating on the tablets.

Pax Christi