An Alternative Look at the Biblical Flood

In Tablet XI, Uta-napishti recounts his escape of the great Diluge and its consequences which gives a different view of the biblical account of Noah's Ark and the Flood. The differences in the way the two tellings of the story reveal the differences in the way the authors view the gods, humanity in relation to the gods, and the aftermaths tell us how each society viewed the future of humanity under the reign of their gods.

From the text it is unclear the cause(s) of the Deluge, though George says it was because the human population's rapid growth caused unbearable noise, preventing Enlil from sleeping. Since no other means was sufficient to diminish the human population for long all the gods swear to keep this plot a secret and finally destroy all of humanity with a flood. Ea tricks them and tells Uta-napishti/Atram-hasis to build an ark which preserves him, his possessions and one of every animal (Introduction pg xliii-xlv). Tablet XI gives an account of the proportions and design of the ark (specified by Ea, built by Uta-napishti), as well as the contents of the ark to be preserved from destruction:"Everything I owned I loaded aboard . . . all the living creatures I had loaded aboard. I sent on board all my kith and kin, the beasts of the field, the creatures of the wild, and members of every skill and craft" (pg 91). It also describes the magnitude of the Deluge, "Even the gods took fright at the Deluge, they left and went up to the heaven of Anu . . ." which means this flood gave no chance for any human to survive on land (pg 92). The Deluge, however, only lasts 7 days, after which Uta-Napishti sends out a sequence of birds to test if the flood has subsided (pg 93-94). Uta-napishti offers a nourishing sacrifice to the gods, Ea reverses Enlil's blame by exposing how close Enlil almost came to wiping out all their worshipers and Enlil and the gods bless Uta-napishti and his wife with eternal life (pg 95). Mortal life is consigned to man at the end of Tablet X (pg 87), and even Gilgamesh cannot escape death, but rather despondently says, "Not for myself did I find a bounty, for the "Lion of the Earth" I have done a favor!" (pg 99). Ultimately, we are left with gods still at odds with humanity for their incessant noise, although now death, still-births, barrenness, etc. prevent them from becoming too numerous. Furthermore, our protagonist is left with only the hope that his legacy remains in the testimony of Uruk's walls. This view of the story depicts gods whose sovereignty is incomplete, who are dependent on humanity's worship, yet who are at odds with it's flaws, who demand the death of humans yet offer no hope for redemption.

On the other hand, the biblical account gives a different perspective of God and man's relation to him and therefore also gives a different outcome while recounting the same events. The biblical account in Genesis 6-9 starts with similar circumstances: mankind's proliferation "When man began to multiply on the face of the land . . . " (Genesis 6:1, ESV), God's abhorrence of the magnitude and universality of their sin, "The Lord saw the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that he had made man . . ." (Gen. 6:5-6). God, in this case, sets man's lifespan at "120 years" before the Flood (Gen. 6:3), which means the Flood is not the solution to a problem God has with humanity itself, but rather with its sin, which George calls mankind's "innate rebelliousness" (Intro xliii). God chooses Noah out of everyone of the earth and tells him to make an ark to save himself, his family, and two of every living thing, which Noah does (Gen. 6:8-22). Like the Gilgamesh account, the proportions of the ark are described (Gen. 6:14-16), as well as the contents to be saved from the flood, "And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you" (Gen. 6:19). The Flood's magnitude is described as lasting "forty days and forty nights," and "the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered" and "Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died" (Gen. 7:17,19,22). An interesting difference here is that God, who is the author of the Flood as in Gilgamesh, is not affected or threatened by the flood as the gods are in Gilgamesh. Rather than multiple, competing, non-immutable, dependent gods, the ancient Hebrew accounts depict God as one, sovereign creator God, who is independent from his creation. However, the account continues to be similar to Gilgamesh in the fact that Noah (our Uta-napishti equivalent) offers a burnt offering to the Lord after his deliverance from the Flood (Gen. 8:20). As a result, God makes a covenant with Noah, promising never to destroy the earth by flood again, and requires a blood price for man's life (Gen. 8:21-22,9:1-17).

Basically, what we have here are two tellings of the same story. The essential difference between the two narratives comes from this outcome difference: in Gilgamesh humanity is left in peril of death and of provoking the wrath of the fickle gods, whereas the biblical account presents a sovereign God who demands justice for sin, and so humanity remains mortal, but with the promise of never destroying them utterly ever again and the promise of a reckoning for the shedding of man's blood, which shows how much God values humanity, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image" (Gen. 9:6). The Judeo-Christian accounts of the Bible point in hope from this story towards a Messiah who will save Israel from their 'innate rebelliousness' and restore pre-flood and pre-Fall perfection. Gilgamesh, however, offers only the hope of immortality in the legacy one leaves behind and proposes no resolution to the enmity between the gods and humanity.