# The Epic of Gilgamesh



## BibleCyst (Feb 16, 2012)

Epic of Gilgamesh - Wikipedia

I need some good, solid insight from Reformed brothers and sisters. At school, my history professor makes frequent references to the Epic of Gilgamesh. These references often involve remarks about "where Moses got his stories." In particular, he referenced the Great Flood. It started to get really old, so I confronted him about it. I had a little previous knowledge on this issue. I told him that I'm rusty on the specifics, but that I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge that the tablet of which that was written on was added later. He conceded immediately, as if he's not used to being confronted (this is community college, afterall). Obviously, what I said didn't cause him to think, because he's still making these kind of remarks. I'm planning on sending him an e-mail with specifics, but I wanted to make sure I'm accurate and not missing anything. From what I can gather, it is tablet 11 that has this flood account on it, which was created in 7th century BC. Genesis was penned around 1400 BC. I feel like this is way too simple, and that I'm inaccurate or missing something. Thoughts?


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 16, 2012)

There is a common source, thus there are similarities. As the early world underwent sin, the fall, the pre-flood civilizations, and the Flood, then the division of mankind, these stories spread throughout the earth. Those stories not preserved by God went astray. When Moses penned his account, therefore, we should expect other ancient accounts to agree somewhat and this is not a proof that the Bible borrowed, but that these events really did happen (such as the flood). 

Even if Moses came later, it does not mean that Moses was wrong.


----------



## Jack K (Feb 16, 2012)

If it really happened, you would expect other cultures to have some memory of it included in their folklore. Only if you believed it couldn't have really happened might you start to ask which source borrowed the idea from the other.


----------



## Irish Presbyterian (Feb 17, 2012)

Here is a short quote from Alistair McKitterick from 'The Language of Genesis' in 'Should Christians Embrace Evolution:

"Despite the common tendency to read Genesis as derived from Babylonian myths or epics, scholarship has now solidly rejected this position. Firstly, if Moses is accepted as the author (somewhere between the 15th–13th century, depending upon your dating method), then it simply makes no sense to read Genesis as a polemic against Babylon, because Babylon only came to prominence as an empire after the 9th century BC. It is worth reemphasizing that Moses was writing in an Egyptian (or at least, wilderness) context, as mentioned earlier, and not a Babylonian one. He was therefore hardly likely to write a polemic against a nation that posed no political or theological threat. Secondly, the linguistic evidence has conclusively shown that Genesis does not reveal any demythologizing."

You might want to check out the falling link for more detail:

Genesis and Ancient Near Eastern Stories of Creation and Flood: An Introduction Part I


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Feb 17, 2012)

I would recommend reading "How to Read Genesis" by Tremper Longman. It discusses the supposed problems in Genesis at length.


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 17, 2012)

Incidentally, there are other references to a great flood in other cultures. I remember watching this on a video many years ago, but it was interesting to see that different places had the same basic idea of a flood that occured at one time.


----------



## TheElk (Feb 17, 2012)

Here is part of a Genesis paper I wrote for class. I hope it helps. The references are from : Hill, Andrew E. and John H. Walton. A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009. Print.

According to Hill and Walton, Genesis chapters one through eleven have some parallels with the literature of the Ancient Near East, especially that of Mesopotamia (79). “Written about 2000 BC, the Atra-Hasis Epic contains an account of creation, growing population, and a destructive flood with similarities to some of the details of Genesis 2-9” (Hill and Walton 79). Hill and Walton further add that a modified version of the Atra-Hasis Epic flood story is contained in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh (79). Discoveries of adaptations of Mesopotamian mythologies throughout the Ancient Near East have caused some to cast doubt on the integrity of the primeval history recorded in Genesis. To others these discoveries tend to strengthen their agreement with Genesis as truth. This evidence can be viewed from two different worldviews. One worldview understands the evidence to undermine the integrity and authenticity of Genesis by sowing doubt against the text to be just another adaptation of Ancient Near East mythology. The other worldview recognizes that the evidence can support the integrity and authenticity of Genesis by understanding that folklore, myths, and legends, are sometimes based on true events. The thinking is that if most ancient civilizations, unbeknownst to one another, worship some form of a God and have similar flood stories, this corroborating evidence should give credence to the existence of God.


----------

