Due Feb 11
Monotheism: evolution or revolution?
Reading: Genesis 1-11 Creation, Flood, and the Tower of Babel (Blackboard: HebrewScripture1.pdf)
Writing: Respond to ONE of the following prompts. Keep your response short, posting as a reply under the appropriate heading in the comments section:
- The Book of Genesis opens with not one but TWO accounts of the creation of human beings: the first describes how the world was created in six days followed by a seventh day of rest; the second tells the story of Adam and Eve’s temptation by the Serpent in Eden. Setting to one side the apparent contradiction (we will address that in class), describe how these accounts differ. Keep your answer short! Don’t give a list of differences; focus on one core difference, a difference of tone or scope or maybe even genre.
- Many of you are probably already familiar with Genesis 1-4, but likely in a different translation. Whereas most Biblical translations are the work of religious organizations, we’re reading the translation by a highly regarded scholar of Ancient Hebrew, Robert Alter. If Alter’s phrasing struck you as odd or surprising at any moment, see if you can dig up the phrasing you’re familiar with (there are lots of Bible translations available online) and quote a line from Alter alongside a line from your version (make sure to label them both clearly). Then comment briefly on which one you like better—and why.
- There are a host of differences between the Biblical story of the flood and the one in Gilgamesh. Highlight one that strikes you as culturally significant in distinguishing the ancient Hebrews from the other peoples of Mesopotamia.
- The Tower of Babel episode provides an account of city-building in sharp contrast with the story of Babylon’s founding in the Enuma Elish. Comment briefly.
Contrasting Two Accounts of the Creation of Humans
⤹Click the reply button just below.
A major difference is God’s attitude towards Adam and Eve. In the first story, God is almost delighted to create Adam and Eve, whereas in the next story, he is disappointed in them because they ate the fruit from the trees.
I agree with you, and I think the first story is more impersonal as well. In the first story God makes humans in his image and that was that. In the second story God, Adam, and Eve are more fully realized. It’s more personal. They talk to each other, and they do things. God is more personified, and so you can see he is disappointed when Adam and Eve fail to do what he asks.
I agree with you as God’s tone shifts from Genesis 1 to Genesis 2. In Genesis 1, God’s attitude is confident and celebratory explaining how creation is described as “good,” and humans are the successful final step. In Genesis 2–3, on the other hand, is the relationship story, where God becomes more emotionally involved whether that be questioning, confronting, or frowning after Adam and Eve disobey his warning.
I agree with your interpretation of the two stories. In the second story, gods relationship to Adam and Eve is portrayed much more personally, whereas in the first it was mainly that Adam and Eve were created under his image. The second story has more of a personal depth and tone to add more context and feelings around Adam and Eve eating the fruit from the tree.
I completely agree with this point, as there is a shift in the attitude of God toward Adam and Eve. I thought of it more as a shift of showing God as this all-powerful spirit that crafts life for man to live in, to showing him taking on parental characteristics when he is mad with their disobedience and punishes them. I thought it was a callback to the idea that God isn’t just “God”, but that he is essentially the father of mankind.
I agree that God’s attitude changes from the first account to the second, but I think it’s also worth noting that God also punishes anyone who disobeys him, like Adam and Eve, but also Cain. God’s attitude shifts to a more dispirited and mighty tone from a cheerful and proud one from the beginning.
The major difference in the stories to me was based on the way in which each story was presented. The story of the Seven Days of creation was presented in a formal and structured way around the seven days. Whereas the story of Adam and Eve felt like more of a narrative, giving each character personalities and moral choices.
Yeah, I agree with this idea. To me, the seven days of creation were presented formally, with repetition, constantly repeating the phrase, “And God said” (1). I think this is to emphasize God’s authority. Whereas in the Adam and Eve story, it felt more narrative, focused on introducing the characters’ personalities, and certainly more like a story. I think the story’s central focus was the lesson that was supposed to come from the myth, unlike the seven day’s story.
I agree with your response; I feel like the second story had much more of a narrative especially because they listed out the whole ancestral lineages of most people. The first story was more about the creation of the world, and the second felt more about the creation of life and humanity. The second story also had more of an intervention role that God played, especially because he chose to save Noah and his family from the flood. In this way, God is trying to push humanity toward creating “good” people. In the first story, it was more of a warning to not approach the tree. I also think the first story is more about how humans gained consciousness to themselves and cognition, while the second was more about how humanity progressed. I also think Noah cursing his grandson for his father’s actions was quite an interesting random side plot to add into it.
I agree and to add on to that, it almost seems as though the narrative form of the story of Adam and Eve is meant to better convey a kind of moral lesson, since it is chastising Adam and Eve for their disobedience to God. Meanwhile the story of the seven days lacks the same kind of didacticism and instead is laid out like a simple history.
I agree with you, as the first account was more a testament to God’s power and his overarching authority/ability to make plants, animals, and the Earth itself. It is much more focused on the act of creation itself in the grand scheme of things. However, the second account of creation is much more myopic, intense viewpoint on the account of Adam and Eve. Because the story is extremely integral as to the events that are to transpire over the course of the entire Bible, to me, it makes the tone appear more narrative and interpersonal.
A key difference between the 2 accounts of the creation of human beings is Gods presence in them. In the first account God appears to be more of a metaphysical force in the universe while in the second he is physical and interacting with Adam and Eve.
I agree with your response. In the first account it shows God creating everything very matter of factly, with him saying “let there be…” and then creating humans just like he did with the light and the waters. In the second account, he is way more personal, going as to even be disappointed in Adam and Eve for not listening to him.
In the first sequence of creation, God seems to be an abstract transcendental being, while in the second sequence, he seems like more of a physical, distinctive being. The first sequence feels more powerful, the telling of a great creator who made the world what it is now. The presence of God feels much more personal in the second sequence, as if he is interacting with us and teaching us about the story.
I agree with you, and to add the second sequence really shows the relationships of both person to person and God to person. When Adam and Eve both eat the fruit, they are ashamed and hide themselves, and God calls out for them, “Where are you?” This shows the care that God has for his creations, and the sympathy he has for the people despite them disobeying him.
The two accounts of the creations of humans are drastically different from each other because of how the stories were told. Adam and Eve’s temptation was written more as a descriptive narrative. However, the creation of the world was told less like a story and more like a poem. The repeated phrases gives it a more formal structure, such as when he says, “Your lifeblood I will requite, from every beast I will requite it, and from humankind, from every man’s brother, I will requite human life” (Genesis 9:5).There are many different times repetition was used throughout this story which is what made the structure of the writing feel different than the story of Adam and Eve which mainly used lots of imagery.
Thoughts on Alter’s Translation
⤹Click the reply button just below.
Contrasting Hebrew scripture with Babylonian myth
⤹Click the reply button just below.
A significant difference lies in the divine reason for the flood. In Gilgamesh, gods decide to put out the flood because people are too “noisy” and prevent the gods from sleeping. It shows the gods are not caring the humanity by making this amoral decision. On the contrary, in Genesis, the flood is a moral judgment that the gods had made. Humans are behaving with wickedness and lawlessness. This contrasts with the Hebrews by establishing a God who stands by a moral code and justice, rather than one driven by irritation.
I agree I also think that the main difference behind floods in Gilgamesh and Genesis is the divine reason for the flood and what it says about the nature of God in each culture. In the story of Gilgamesh, representing Mesopotamian culture, the gods are portrayed as self-interested and unpredictable with humankind at their will in a sinister and tyrannical way. In contrast, Genesis presents the flood as strictly a moral judgement on humankind with Noah being spared because he is righteous and obedient. This portrays the Hebrew God as moral just, consistent, and purposeful to humankind. The purpose of the flood in the respective Gods eyes is the main contrast that highlights larger contrasts between not only stories, but cultures.
One difference between the depiction of the great flood in Gilgamesh and the Hebrew scripture is the moral motivations behind the flood. In Gilgamesh, the gods are fickle and petty, choosing to wipe out humans because they deemed them too noisy and disturbed their sleep. Meanwhile, in the Hebrew scripture, God sends the flood as a just and righteous response to the “evil of the human creature,” as “every scheme of his heart’s devising was only perpetually evil” (Genesis 6). The flood was a retribution for human wickedness, corruption, and violence. In Mesopotamian culture, the gods are unpredictable and see humans as existing to serve them, then destroying them when they become too disturbing. In Genesis, humans are created in the image of God, but ruin their potential through evil, making the flood a corrective action rather than an annoyed whim.
I think you are right that the gods were being “fickle” in sending the flood, and that the Hebrew god was trying to correct the mistake of man. But I would do think they are similar in the ascpet that both gods are attempting to punish the people of earth for wroning them. Obviously the Mesopotamian gods reason was less legitmate and meant to show their wickedness but God in the Hebrew bible still believes that man serves him by being good to each other and when they fail to do that he will not hesitate to destroy them. Both stores are meant to inspire fear of god in on away or another. God demonstrate his power to destroy but tells Noah “I will not strike down living things as I did” (Genesis 8) meaning he though he is to be feared he is all to be loved
One key difference between the flood in Gilgamesh and the flood in Genesis are the survivors. In Gilgamesh, Utnapishtim survives the flood because Ea went behind the other gods’ backs and warned him with time to prepare. In Genesis, Noah is specifically chosen by God to build the ark because he is a righteous man and God feels he deserves to survive. Where Utnapishtim’s survival is the result of deceit, Noah’s survival is due to his faith and virtue.
The Tower of Babel vs the Founding of Babylon
⤹Click the reply button just below.
The Tower of Babel differs starkly with the founding of Babylon in their relationships with their gods. One is built in service of the gods while the other is built in defiance. Babylon was founded by the hero-god Marduk as “the houses of the great gods” (Tablet 5). In contrast, the Tower of Babel was not sanctioned by God. Rather, in building it they angered God so badly he scattered them across the Earth and left the tower abandoned (Alter 7).
I agree with you that the differences in how the Tower of Babel was founded point to the relationship people had with their gods. As you mentioned, the Tower of Babel episode depicts humans building the tower as a “service” or gift to the gods, rather than a way to see eye to eye with them as described in Genesis. In addition, I also believe it reflects how God viewed humanity. In the Tower of Babel episode, it spoke to the great effort and power of unity among mankind to build such a tower, in a way that acknowledged the sacrifices humans made to God. In contrast, Genesis depicts the creation of the tower harshly, seeing it as a greedy attempt to attain the same power as the divine.
I believe this reflects humanity’s purpose. In the story of Babylon we learn that humanity was created from the shards of a God and meant to serve. They are part of the divine, but their potential (which is clear for they labored to built a great city) is highly limited by servitude. Meanwhile, in the story of Babel, we learn that “God created the human in his image” and “God fashioned the human, humus from the soil”. Thus, despite not being specifically godly in some respect, humanity is capable of great potential because it was created to “fill the earth and conquer it”. Therefore, the founding of Babylon and Babel serve to exemplify and establish the relationships between humanity and the Godly.
The tower of Babel serves two contrasting perspectives on Human’s intentions and relationship with the divine. In Enuma Elish the tower was created in “service of the God’s” while in the scripture the tower was established in human defiance, the humans wanted to “make a name for [themselves]”. God’s reaction to both is entirely different, in one he views the creation of Babel as a testament to mans faith and devotion, while in the Scripture, God views it as an act of human defiance attempting to challenge the divine.
In the Enuma Elish, the founding of Babylon takes place from divine violence and consolidation of power—the gods build Marduk’s temple to honor Marduk for establishing cosmic order. It’s an account that justifies Babylon’s existence. In Genesis, the Tower of Babel is a grassroots project where the humans came together to build the tower, and God intervenes to disrupt it, “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the human creatures had built. And the Lord said, “As one people with one language for all, if this is what they have begun to do, now nothing they plot to do will elude them. Come, let us go down and baffle their language there so that they will not understand each other’s language” (Genesis 11). In this account, the concern is centered around human unity and the emphasis is on limiting human ambition instead of celebrating centralized power. This makes Genesis the inverse of the Enuma Elish.