Background
The flood stories in the Babylonian text ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet XI’ and the Hebrew text ‘Genesis 6-9’ (Deem) have been targets of international attention due to a controversy created by enemies of Christianity, namely, that the tale in Genesis is not a genuine historical event, but just an unethical copy of a flood story in Mesopotamia as recorded in the Babylonian text. While both stories have many similarities, they also contradict each other in several points, due to which, along with its other inherent strengths, the Genesis version appears to be the accurate one.
Similarities
The first set of 3 similarities in both stories deals with divine anger and divine decision to punish mankind, culminating in the choice of a righteous man. God/the Gods wanted to punish mankind. Genesis states man’s crime as having become too evil and sinful, while the Babylonian text charges mankind with having become too numerous and clamorous. Secondly, God/the Gods decided that the appropriate punishment was a huge flood that would deluge the whole world and destroy mankind as well as all land-based birds and animals. Thirdly, God/the Gods chose one man whom they considered was righteous. Genesis names him as Noah while The Epic of Gilgamesh calls him Ut-Napishtim (Robinson).
The second set of 6 similarities relate to the ark. God/the Gods commanded the chosen one to construct a multi-storey ark made of wood. It must be sealed with tar. It should have one main door. It should have at least one window. It should have several inside compartments. Once it was completed, it must be boarded by the chosen one, a few other people and a sample of every kind of land animal (Robinson).
The third set of 3 similarities concern the description of the flood. The entire land was deluged with water due to heavy rain. Even the mountains were covered with water. The ark finally came to rest on top of a mountain located in the Middle East (Robinson).
The last set of 7 similarities occurs in the aftermath of the flood. The chosen one sent out 3 birds periodically to check if there was any dry land in the surrounding area. The first 2 birds came back to the ark. The third bird obviously found dry land as it did not come back to the ark. The chosen one and his family disembarked from the ark, performed the rite of killing an animal, and presented it to God/the Gods as an act of worship. The aroma of the roasted sacrificial animal reached God/the Gods. The chosen one was blessed. God/the Gods appeared to truly regret the destruction they had created (Robinson).
Arguments that prove The Epic of Gilgamesh copied from Genesis
The first argument is that there are several differences between the two stories. One would not expect such dissimilarities to appear if one story was indeed copied from the other due to the lack of any obvious or understandable reason for doing so (Deem). The first dissimilarity is that Noah got his message directly from God, while Ut-Napishtim got his instructions indirectly during the course of a dream. Secondly, although both arks landed on top of mountains in the Middle East, Noah’s ark came to rest on Mount Arafat, while the Babylonian ark landed on Mount Nisir; the distance between the 2 mountains is in excess of one hundred miles. Thirdly, Noah’s flood came in 2 parts: some underground water came to the surface while heavy rains lashed the world continuously for 40 days and nights . In the Babylonian text, the flood only originated from heavy rains that fell continuously for 6 days (Robinson). Fourthly, there is a difference in the birds sent out by the chosen one. Noah first sent out a raven, while Ut-Napishtim sent out a dove. Noah next sent out a dove, while Ut-Napishtim sent out a swallow. The third bird sent out by Ut-Napishtim was a raven, while Noah sent out a dove again . There is no fourth bird sent out by Ut-Napishtim, whereas in Genesis the fourth bird sent out by Noah was a dove . Lastly, the sacrificial offering made by Ut-Napishtim to the Gods involved wines and a sheep, while Noah’s offering involved roasted parts of clean animals, but no wine (Deem).
The second argument is that since Genesis was written 8 centuries before The Epic of Gilgamesh, it is impossible that the flood story contained in it could have been copied from the latter. The Epic of Gilgamesh was written on 12 large stone tablets that are dated around 650 B.C (Deem), whereas the Christian Prophet Moses wrote Genesis much earlier than that , just before he died (Robinson). The gross disparity in dates is underlined by archeological evidence that puts the date of the Babylonian text as 650 B.C (Sarfati).
The third argument lies in the description of both arks. God commanded Noah to build his ark according to the size 300x50x30 cubits , that is nearly 140x23x13.5 meters or 459x75x44 feet with a volume of 43,500 cubic meters or 1.54 million cubic feet. These dimensions made the ark exceptionally stable and safe to navigate in disturbed waters that one would encounter during a flood. In contrast, Ut-Napishtim’s ark was merely a large cube that would surely capsize and roll over in every direction if it encountered even the least disturbance. The only conclusion from this comparison is that while the authors of the Babylonian story did not understand why the genuine ark’s measurements had to be the way they were projected , the opposite is impossible, namely, that the Hebrew authors of Genesis, with hardly any reputation in the naval architectural field, copied the imaginary cubic ark and magically transformed it into a wooden vessel with optimal stability (Sarfati).
The fourth argument is that God/the Gods in both texts are portrayed differently in several parts of the flood story. Genesis relates that God’s decisions are just, He displayed patience towards mankind for 120 years , He is merciful to Noah, and He is sovereign. In contrast, the Gods in the Babylonian story are given to sudden changes, quarrel among themselves, cringe in fear at the flood, and starve without human beings to provide them sacrificial food. This proves that while God in Genesis is indeed divine, the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh rewrote the truthful account by creating their Gods in their own image (Sarfati).
The last argument is that it has so far never been proven that any part of the Bible is false. It therefore follows that Genesis 6:9 which contains the account of the flood is also inerrant in that it is totally honest, accurate and includes no mistake in its original form (Robinson). The most conclusive proof of the Bible’s accuracy is that it contains predictions from Prophets that have come true, whereas the same has not happened even once in the case of any other religion’s holy book including the Koran, which is the holy book of Islam, the religion that has the second largest following in the world. A prediction has to abide by 4 mandatory qualifications. It must take place earlier than the even foretold, it must be fulfilled by people or events beyond the periphery of the predictor’s influence, it must be made in reasonable detail and it must correctly take place at a later date. For example, Prophet Jeremiah predicted in 626 B.C that, as a punishment to the sinners in Judah, God would arrange for King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon to attack Judah, subdue it and take the vanquished Jews as captives to Babylon; the Jews would remain in captivity for 7 decades, after which Babylon would be defeated and God would arrange for the return of most of the Jewish captives to Judah (Totten). In addition to the above, Jesus Christ himself describes the flood as a genuine event of history, as genuine as His own Future second coming: “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also it will be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the Ark. Then the flood came, and destroyed them all” (Sarfati).
Conclusion
The many differences between The Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis, especially the disparity in timing of each flood story and the structure of the arks underlined by the fact that Genesis was written much earlier than the Babylonian text, when coupled with the proven honesty and accuracy of the Bible, leads to the inescapable conclusion that the flood story in The Epic of Gilgamesh is nothing but a dishonest account of the true Genesis version.
References
Deem, R. “Is the Biblical Flood Account a Modified Copy of The Epic of Gilgamesh?” Godandscience.org. 2008. Web.
Robinson, B.A. “Comparison of the Babylonian & Noachian Flood Stories.” Religioustolerance.org. 2007. Web.
Sarfati, J. “Noah’s Flood & the Gilgamesh Epic.” Creation Ministries International. 2004. Web.
Totten, R. “The Koran (Quran) vs. the Bible: Prophets’ Predictions show which one is truly from God.” Geocities.com. 2002. Web.