Noah or Ut-Napishtim

[Sosobra]

Most of us are familiar with the flood story from the Torah and the bible. Less known however is the story of Ut-Napishtim which is contained in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Chaldean Flood Tablets from the city of Ur. Both tell the story of a man who is told by A God (EA) or God (Abrahamic) to build an Ark because men has become wicked.

Several Common points between the stories

- The Genesis story describes how mankind had become obnoxious to God; they were hopelessly sinful and wicked. In the Babylonian story, they were too numerous and noisy.

-The Gods (or God) knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.

- The Gods (or God) ordered the hero to build a multi-story wooden ark (called a chest or box in the original Hebrew).

-The hero sent out birds at regular intervals to find if any dry land was in the vicinity.

-The first two birds returned to the ark. The third bird apparently found dry land because it did not return.

-The Babylonian gods seemed genuinely sorry for the genocide that they had created. The God of Noah appears to have regretted his actions as well, because he promised never to do it again.


The most interesting thing about the stories is that story of Ut-Napishtim has been found in tablets that date from 2000 BCE and the language used indicates that the story is older than that.

The Genesis account depending on your scholarly persuasion (Bible literalism - liberal theology) dates from 1450 BCE (Literalism) to 950-540 (liberal) . \

So is this Flood story from the Judo Christian background copied from an earlier Sumerian text? The historical recored in my opinion says it is and if it is does it cast suspicion on the divine inspiration on the rest of the document.

There are other examples of the Historical record not matching ancient religious documents : the Jews bondage in Egypt there is no record of Jewish slaves being used and not only that but Egyptians did not use slave labor ( the used convict labor but no record shows them enslaving entire populations)

[Ummon]

Yes, parts of Genesis are excerpted from Babylonian myths. It's widespread knowledge.

[Blau&Gruen]

Utanapishtim
Atrahasis
Ziusudra
---------
characters of various mythical tales around floods, destructions and rescues

a) Utanpishtim, see Gilgamesh Tabl. 11
Andrew George, The Epic of Gilgamesh, Penguin Classics, ca. $8
b) Atrahasis, see Atrahasis Tabl. 3
Ziusudra, fragment of an independant composition in sumerian language
Wilfred G. Lambert, A.R. Millard, Miguel Civil, Atra-Hasis, The Babylonian Story of the Flood, ca. $30

The books can all be bought at amazon.

[Lord Bohemond]

I'm reading Isaac Asimov's commentary on the OT. It's very good. He discusses the archeological possibility that there was a very large flood in the Mesopotamia region, perhaps from serious river flooding, or perhaps even a small meteor.

Makes sense. That would explain why all the peoples in the region have their own flood story.

[Sosobra]

I'm reading Isaac Asimov's commentary on the OT. It's very good. He discusses the archeological possibility that there was a very large flood in the Mesopotamia region, perhaps from serious river flooding, or perhaps even a small meteor.

Makes sense. That would explain why all the peoples in the region have their own flood story.

yes it would but wouldn't also take away for the Literalism that some put in the bible and if part of it is a story to explain natural events what stops the rest from being so.

[Lord Bohemond]

Well, a flood did literally happen, didn't it?

[Falconius]

-The Genesis story describes how mankind had become obnoxious to God; they were hopelessly sinful and wicked. In the Babylonian story, they were too numerous and noisy.

Not that this has much to do with anything, but going against God is not the same as being 'obnoxious'.

-The Babylonian gods seemed genuinely sorry for the genocide that they had created. The God of Noah appears to have regretted his actions as well, because he promised never to do it again.

Again not really the point, but there is nowhere an indication in the Bible that he 'regretted' acting. Promising not to flood the world again after Noah says, "Whats the point of breeding if it all ends destroyed?" is not quite the same thing as saying "Whoops, I'm sorry.."

The most interesting thing about the stories is that story of Ut-Napishtim has been found in tablets that date from 2000 BCE and the language used indicates that the story is older than that.

The Genesis account depending on your scholarly persuasion (Bible literalism - liberal theology) dates from 1450 BCE (Literalism) to 950-540 (liberal) . \

So is this Flood story from the Judo Christian background copied from an earlier Sumerian text? The historical recored in my opinion says it is and if it is does it cast suspicion on the divine inspiration on the rest of the document.

As has already been pointed out these similarities are well known about. At the same time commonality between peoples stories does not mean that one was copied from the other any more then it does that people all saw the same thing and had their own stories. In short, despite there being an earlier text, if it is already common knowledge among people that a flood happened then it would be unsurprising that there would be multiple accounts of it from the different peoples who experienced it. Again there is no more proof that it is copied from the tablets text than that everybody experienced the same thing.

[Roy Batty]

Not that this has much to do with anything, but going against God is not the same as being 'obnoxious'.

As has already been stated by many experts of the Bible(s) and its (their - various) translations, meanings have been accidently and deliberately skewed. It's a fair comparison; let's not split hairs.

As has already been pointed out these similarities are well known about. At the same time commonality between peoples stories does not mean that one was copied from the other any more then it does that people all saw the same thing and had their own stories.

Yes, yes. The Roman pantheon of gods is purely original and so are Tolkien's Dwarves. By your reasoning Big Foot is real.

In short, despite there being an earlier text, if it is already common knowledge among people that a flood happened then it would be unsurprising that there would be multiple accounts of it from the different peoples who experienced it. Again there is no more proof that it is copied from the tablets text than that everybody experienced the same thing.

Is it common knowledge that a great flood covered the Earth? Doh! I forgot, that's how we have the Grand Canyon today. Silly me.

[enoch]

Is it common knowledge that a great flood covered the Earth? Doh! I forgot, that's how we have the Grand Canyon today. Silly me.

[Blau&Gruen]

So is this Flood story from the Judo Christian background copied from an earlier Sumerian text? The historical recored in my opinion says it is and if it is does it cast suspicion on the divine inspiration on the rest of the document.

Your question cannot be answered, the way you have asked it. However, the assumption of a sumerian source for Noah is vain.

Pentateuch Hypothesis (classical version)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentateuch
In classical Documentary Hypothesis, as most popularly proposed by Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), the Pentateuch is composed of four separate and identifiable texts, dating roughly from the period of Solomon up until exilic priests and scribes. These various texts were brought together as one document (the Pentateuch, or Torah) by scribes after the exile. The traditional names are:

The Jahwist (or J) - written circa 850 BCE. The southern kingdom's (i.e. Judah) interpretation. It is named according to the prolific use of the name "Yahweh" (or Jaweh, in German, the divine name or Tetragrammaton) in its text.
The Elohist (or E) - written circa 750 BCE. The northern kingdom's (i.e. Israel) interpretation. As above, it is named because of its preferred use of "Elohim" (Generic name for "god" in Hebrew).
The Deuteronomist (or D) - written circa 621 BCE. Dating specifically from the time of King Josiah of Judah and responsible for the book of Deuteronomy as well as Joshua and most of the subsequent books up to 2 Kings.
The Priestly source (or P) - written during or after the exile. So named because of its focus on levitical laws.
There is debate amongst scholars as to exactly how many different documents compose the corpus of the Pentateuch, and as to what sections of text are included in the different documents.

A number of smaller independent texts have also been identified, including the Song of the Sea and other works, mainly in verse, most of them older than the four main texts. The individual books were edited and combined into their present form by the Redactor, frequently identified with the scribe Ezra, in the post-Babylonian exile period.

[Syron]

well when you consider where abraham is supposed to have come from it's hardly surprising!

[enoch]

also - mythologists have found that there are many overarching myths that seem to occur in nearly every culture regardless of external instigators

the water or flood myth is likely one of these

sure it may be some hold over from an ice age - but considering how widespread it is (way, way, way away from anything at all mesopotamian)

it is likely one of the many myths that comes from our shared psychological past, and I mean from primate to ocean sludge

something to ponder

[Falconius]

Pardon me? As Enoch said it was a common myth among a lot of people for a long time. As such it was common knowledge for people at that time. Whether it actually happened or not is entirely irrelevant to this conversation. The point is that many people thought it did, and that does not necessarily point to a specific derivation from the tablets.

[Roy Batty]

Pardon me? As Enoch said it was a common myth among a lot of people for a long time. As such it was common knowledge for people at that time. Whether it actually happened or not is entirely irrelevant to this conversation. The point is that many people thought it did, and that does not necessarily point to a specific derivation from the tablets.

What is common between the many flood myths is that once, there was "a" flood. Go figure. Human beings live near water. The similarities in the details (not the generalities) of these two specific stories is where I find the derivation.

[Lusted]

Correction: lots of cultures have flood myths, but hardly any of them agree on size or date or what happened. Only some are very similar, like the Sumerian and Bible versions. Given how common flooding it as the widespread devestation it can cause it's not surprising there are lots of flood stories.

[enoch]

not even the sumerian and bible versions agree on the size or date or what happened
and one was likely taken from the other -

[Blau&Gruen]

not even the sumerian and bible versions agree on the size or date or what happened

So, is it.

one was likely taken from the other

very unlikely

[enoch]

really - not even..... the story was passed to the "heirs" of the sumerians, et al
some sort of Jackal/crocodile/etc worshippers who maybe had a population arise within them at some point that later involved a guy we call Moses - and that is why the story is in the bible

not even a lil maybe?

[Blau&Gruen]

not even a lil maybe?

It is not well preserved, so far no "líl".

[enoch]

different strokes.....fair enough