I'm reading Babylonian Myths

[Meh_Gerbil]

I got a 10 volumn set on Mythology from Easten Press - I've had the set for over 2 years and I'm just getting down to reading some of it. I picked up the "Babylonian/Assyrian" myth book and it is a fun read so far.

In addition to the "Flood Epic of Gilgimesh" (sp) there is also another flood account that reads almost like the Genesis account (dates as far back as 2000 BC). Also, one ruler (Sargon) was found in a basket just like Moses (or so the legend says). The parallels between the OT and the Babylonian are a scream.

[technomage]

I got a 10 volumn set on Mythology from Easten Press - I've had the set for over 2 years and I'm just getting down to reading some of it. I picked up the "Babylonian/Assyrian" myth book and it is a fun read so far.

Ooh! If that's the set I think it is, I'm so jealous: I can't find it locally.

[The Curtmudgeon]

I got a 10 volumn set on Mythology from Easten Press - I've had the set for over 2 years and I'm just getting down to reading some of it. I picked up the "Babylonian/Assyrian" myth book and it is a fun read so far.

In addition to the "Flood Epic of Gilgimesh" (sp) there is also another flood account that reads almost like the Genesis account (dates as far back as 2000 BC). Also, one ruler (Sargon) was found in a basket just like Moses (or so the legend says). The parallels between the OT and the Babylonian are a scream.

Before you get too caught up in the "parallels", I would strongly suggest you check out this article (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/gilgymess.html) on The Christian Think-Tank, and its sub-articles (links included in the top article). It's very thorough and impressive; I suggest you bring a sack lunch (or two) -- but it's very worthwhile. I had done some heavy reading in the subject before, but Glenn Miller had a lot to show me.

Don't take this as a put-down of reading the ANE mythologies, or even of enjoying them. I've always enjoyed my reading/studying of mythologies, mostly Graeco-Roman and Norse, but a lot of spot-reading in many others including (as mentioned) the ANE. But the idea that there are a lot of parallels is a position that really doesn't bear close scrutiny.

The (just hoping to broaden your enjoyment by broadening your understanding) Curtmudgeon

[Meh_Gerbil]

Ooh! If that's the set I think it is, I'm so jealous: I can't find it locally.

I order them directly from Easton Press (www.eastonpress.com (http://www.eastonpress.com))

[Meh_Gerbil]

Before you get too caught up in the "parallels", I would strongly suggest you check out this article (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/gilgymess.html) on The Christian Think-Tank, and its sub-articles (links included in the top article). It's very thorough and impressive; I suggest you bring a sack lunch (or two) -- but it's very worthwhile. I had done some heavy reading in the subject before, but Glenn Miller had a lot to show me.

Don't take this as a put-down of reading the ANE mythologies, or even of enjoying them. I've always enjoyed my reading/studying of mythologies, mostly Graeco-Roman and Norse, but a lot of spot-reading in many others including (as mentioned) the ANE. But the idea that there are a lot of parallels is a position that really doesn't bear close scrutiny.

The (just hoping to broaden your enjoyment by broadening your understanding) Curtmudgeon

I believe that if a world wide flood occured that several cultures would speak of it - albeit it corrupted forms. I find that similar stories existing is actually a boost to my faith - I don't believe the stories are precursors.

[shunyadragon]

Before you get too caught up in the "parallels", I would strongly suggest you check out this article (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/gilgymess.html) on The Christian Think-Tank, and its sub-articles (links included in the top article). It's very thorough and impressive; I suggest you bring a sack lunch (or two) -- but it's very worthwhile. I had done some heavy reading in the subject before, but Glenn Miller had a lot to show me.

Don't take this as a put-down of reading the ANE mythologies, or even of enjoying them. I've always enjoyed my reading/studying of mythologies, mostly Graeco-Roman and Norse, but a lot of spot-reading in many others including (as mentioned) the ANE. But the idea that there are a lot of parallels is a position that really doesn't bear close scrutiny.

The (just hoping to broaden your enjoyment by broadening your understanding) Curtmudgeon

I reviewed the cited article and I do not find it very through and impressive. It basically failed to even cite many of the more modern scholars that advocate the belief that the OT Genesis legends are a synthesis of borrrowed and traditional oral legends. The total lack of any significant OT Biblical texts older than the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the abundent finds of Babylonian texts of similar legends is something that was not well addressed in the article. The article stressed the dissimilarities as demonstrating the uniqueness of the Biblical version, which is well accepted by modern scholars who believe the stories are borrowed, and then combined with traditional Hebrew oral legends.

[shunyadragon]

I believe that if a world wide flood occured that several cultures would speak of it - albeit it corrupted forms. I find that similar stories existing is actually a boost to my faith - I don't believe the stories are precursors.

Could you cite any archeological evidence that would support that the Biblical stories are not a synthesis of Hebrew and Babylonian oral legends and myths.

[Meh_Gerbil]

Could you cite any archeological evidence that would support that the Biblical stories are not a synthesis of Hebrew and Babylonian oral legends and myths.

The oldest recorded version of many of these stories appear to be written by Babylonians.

So?

If an actual event of the proportion of a world wide flood (or huge regional flood) occurred I would expect records of that event to turn up in several cultures around the world. Because of this, the story is common to all mankind and I find that thrilling.

What I see in all these legends (even the Messianic ones) is that the world knew what to expect when the Messiah came -- it was common knowledge and G_D chose to work in a way that people would recognize. Again, I find that extremely exciting. (The promise of a coming Messiah in the garden would filter out to all ancient cultures that arose from Adam and Eve)

I think what I would find distressing is if we could go back to the most ancient of literature and find absolutely no concept of sacrifice or a world wide flood, or a great dragon struggling against the higher gods or a messiah figure. No, the OT and the NT are woven into the very fabric of human culture because they are true - and well understood by the oldest of cultures.

The struggle between the Dragon and the Most High is something everyone gets - even the Babylonians - it is only modern man that has educated himself in to ignorance.

[shunyadragon]

The oldest recorded version of many of these stories appear to be written by Babylonians.

So?

If an actual event of the proportion of a world wide flood (or huge regional flood) occurred I would expect records of that event to turn up in several cultures around the world. Because of this, the story is common to all mankind and I find that thrilling.

What I see in all these legends (even the Messianic ones) is that the world knew what to expect when the Messiah came -- it was common knowledge and G_D chose to work in a way that people would recognize. Again, I find that extremely exciting. (The promise of a coming Messiah in the garden would filter out to all ancient cultures that arose from Adam and Eve)

I think what I would find distressing is if we could go back to the most ancient of literature and find absolutely no concept of sacrifice or a world wide flood, or a great dragon struggling against the higher gods or a messiah figure. No, the OT and the NT are woven into the very fabric of human culture because they are true - and well understood by the oldest of cultures.

The struggle between the Dragon and the Most High is something everyone gets - even the Babylonians - it is only modern man that has educated himself in to ignorance.

First, the legend of the flood is not common to all ancient cultures. For example Some regions of ancient Chinese and Mongolian legends and myths do not include a world flood, is that distressing? In the central Chinese and Mongolian legends the floods are specifically related to the floods of the great rivers and do not cover the mountains. For example, in the Chinese legend (Gong gong legend) the people live in the mountains when the valleys flood. In the Mongolian/Chinese legend the story (Hailibu),is specific to one location and the waters come from the mountains after a great rain and fill the valley killing the people.

The dragon of Chinese mythology is not seen struggling against the higher Gods.

The messiah figure is more common and universal, but this figure is always represented as a person who lived and taught within that culture and will return.

[Meh_Gerbil]

First, the legend of the flood is not common to all ancient cultures. For example Some regions of ancient Chinese and Mongolian legends and myths do not include a world flood, is that distressing? In the central Chinese and Mongolian legends the floods are specifically related to the floods of the great rivers and do not cover the mountains. For example, in the Chinese legend (Gong gong legend) the people live in the mountains when the valleys flood. In the Mongolian/Chinese legend the story (Hailibu),is specific to one location and the waters come from the mountains after a great rain and fill the valley killing the people.

The dragon of Chinese mythology is not seen struggling against the higher Gods.

The messiah figure is more common and universal, but this figure is always represented as a person who lived and taught within that culture and will return.

I wouldn't expect any particular historical event to make it through every culture - would you?

What I find fascinating about all of this is that Abraham was called out about the time the stories began to get corrupted beyond recognition. The concept of one people or one culture being set aside to preserve the record of these events makes a great deal of sense. (And it worked - we've only 'discovered' these Babylonian myths in the last two hundred years - the Jews have known about all this since Abraham).

From a Christian perspective, the Babylonian myths make a great deal of sense - and the timing of the call of Abraham is wonderful and quite rational. I find the whole thing incredibly beautiful.

[shunyadragon]

I wouldn't expect any particular historical event to make it through every culture - would you?

No I do not, but in your previous post you apparently did in a previous post.

I think what I would find distressing is if we could go back to the most ancient of literature and find absolutely no concept of sacrifice or a world wide flood, or a great dragon struggling against the higher gods or a messiah figure. No, the OT and the NT are woven into the very fabric of human culture because they are true - and well understood by the oldest of cultures.


I acknowledge that catastrophic legends, such as floods and tidal waves are known to be carried down through generations through oral traditions. In many cases it is well know that these ancient oral traditions relate to very real local and regional events and not a world flood. A good example is the small Stone Age tribe in India that preserved the oral tradition of the great flood that destroyed all the people in the world except a few, and knew the signs of the coming of this great flood (tidal wave) from these oral legends and fled saving all the people in the tribe.

What I find fascinating about all of this is that Abraham was called out about the time the stories began to get corrupted beyond recognition. The concept of one people or one culture being set aside to preserve the record of these events makes a great deal of sense. (And it worked - we've only 'discovered' these Babylonian myths in the last two hundred years - the Jews have known about all this since Abraham).

There is no known record that the Jews had recorded or did know these stories in a form as they appear in the Bible any earlier that their period of captivity. We have absolutely no archeological evidence of these stories existing in this form as they are in the Bible before the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls. These stories can betraced back indirectly to the Babylonians to about 600 to 800 years, but before this we have zero evidence. On the other hand we have abundent evidence From Egypt to beyond the fertile cresent in clay tablets and stone of earlier similar legends in other cultures, primarily Babylonian.

What archeological evidence could you cite that any of the Biblical texts existed or could be traced back to ~900 BC or earlier?

[XaositectCrayon]

I doubt there was even a worldwide flood... I think it's just natural to assume it was an account of the extreme water level rising around 10k bce. Note alot of people think early man lived and seafood and seafood is known to be brainfood. So the lowland areas next to the ocean have ALWAYS been favored by man. That and they are rather furtile. if there was a pre-stoneage Civ that early they would be close to the shoreline... then the sea level would have been lower. It could have flooded all the lowland areas nearly simultaneously to look like a worldwide flood.

[Meh_Gerbil]

What archeological evidence could you cite that any of the Biblical texts existed or could be traced back to ~900 BC or earlier?

I already said that according to my reading the earlist writings we seem to have (in this catagory) would be Babylonian (2000 BC). I think that is very interesting. :teeth:

That is covering alot of history.

[shunyadragon]

I already said that according to my reading the earlist writings we seem to have (in this catagory) would be Babylonian (2000 BC). I think that is very interesting. :teeth:

That is covering alot of history.

Are you agreeing that the origin of the Biblical stories primarily from the known Babylonian sources given the lack of evidence for other sources?

[Meh_Gerbil]

Are you agreeing that the origin of the Biblical stories primarily from the known Babylonian sources given the lack of evidence for other sources?

No.

We each carry a different set of assumptions into how we view what we are finding.

You carry the assumption that the Jewish scriptures are the product of an evolution of thought and mythology. Because of this, it is natural that the oldest texts we've found would be seen as preceeding the more recent texts - it is very rational to conclude that the former gave rise to the later. However, you have absolutely no proof of such an evolution.

I carry the assumption that all mankind came into being like the Bible said and because of this certain historical events would be likely carried by oral tradition for many generations - since they were events common to the ancestory of all men. Moses wrote down (I believe with G_d's aid) what everyone living at the time already knew - but was being corrupted by the surrounding cultures. Like you, I have no way to prove that - we are just operating under different presuppositions.

When I read Babylonian mythology I'm reading corrupted versions of the truth and I find that fascinating. I honestly feel sorry for people who ascend to the height of modern thinking and in the process reduce even the wonderful history of man's struggle with G_d to a set of sterile evolving mythologies - none of which are to be believed.

As for proof of the Bible - I find that all over the place. As it turns out, Nimrod did exist, and there was a great flood, and many other great things occured. Even the Babylonians knew this....why did you forget it? :wink:

My position is just as rational as yours, it merely starts with a different set of presuppositions.

[lee_merrill]

Just for those who don't have the umpteen-volume set of myths!

Talk.origins has quite a list of flood stories here (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html).

It is indeed most widespread, and in many instances, there is a Noah stand-in.

Chesterton had a comment (which I cannot find) along the lines of MG's point here, "The reason we don't believe in a flood is because people in every culture remember it," or words to that effect...

Blessings,
Lee

[shunyadragon]

Just for those who don't have the umpteen-volume set of myths!

Talk.origins has quite a list of flood stories here (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html).

It is indeed most widespread, and in many instances, there is a Noah stand-in.

Chesterton had a comment (which I cannot find) along the lines of MG's point here, "The reason we don't believe in a flood is because people in every culture remember it," or words to that effect...

Blessings,
Lee

Yes the stories of a flood are quit common, but they definitely do not all refer toa world flood as I previously mentioned. It is also true that local and regional floods of catastrophic proportions are also quit common, which can very well account for these oral myths and legends without trying justify a world flood.

[Meh_Gerbil]

Yes the stories of a flood are quit common, but they definitely do not all refer toa world flood as I previously mentioned. It is also true that local and regional floods of catastrophic proportions are also quit common, which can very well account for these oral myths and legends without trying justify a world flood.

You need to decide if these myths evolved from a common source (teh Bible came from Babylon!!!!!!) or if they are based on local unique events.

It seems to me that you want to get away from all/most of the ancient flood myths having a single source because that would indicate a single event (oh no!) but when it comes to the Bible you want to exclude the possibility of a unique event in favor of claiming the Bible has it's precursor in Babylonian myth.

I suppose it can be whatever it needs to be, eh?

Incidently, the flood myths I've been reading are too similar to be from unique sources - they aren't talking about just any flood, they are talking about TEH FLOOD. A guy saves just a few people and all teh animals in a boat and lets doves free to check for dry land? Some of the elements are just too similar for there to be seperate sources.

[shunyadragon]

No.

We each carry a different set of assumptions into how we view what we are finding.

You carry the assumption that the Jewish scriptures are the product of an evolution of thought and mythology. Because of this, it is natural that the oldest texts we've found would be seen as preceeding the more recent texts - it is very rational to conclude that the former gave rise to the later. However, you have absolutely no proof of such an evolution.

Proof is an illusive quest, but I believe the evidence best supports my view.

I carry the assumption that all mankind came into being like the Bible said and because of this certain historical events would be likely carried by oral tradition for many generations - since they were events common to the ancestory of all men. Moses wrote down (I believe with G_d's aid) what everyone living at the time already knew - but was being corrupted by the surrounding cultures. Like you, I have no way to prove that - we are just operating under different presuppositions.

Acctually no, I base my case more on the available evidence. My only presuppositions in this case would be the evidence that is known and Occam's Razor. Based on the evidence that local and regional floods of catastrophic proportions are very common, thus it would be expected that oral legends for these catastrophies would be common. There is no evidence for a catastrophic flood that covered the whole world, therefore ancient legends cannot be corraborated with any evidence whatsoever that such a flood ever occured.

When I read Babylonian mythology I'm reading corrupted versions of the truth and I find that fascinating. I honestly feel sorry for people who ascend to the height of modern thinking and in the process reduce even the wonderful history of man's struggle with G_d to a set of sterile evolving mythologies - none of which are to be believed.

A feel sorry for people who make these generalizations concerning how others believe. No, all scientists, historians and others like myself that do not believe in a world flood - actually by far the majority of scholars and scientists - DO NOT reduce the wonderful history of the human struggle (with God -some do some do not) to a set of sterile evolving mythologies - none of which are to be believed. Most like myself, they believe ancient mythologies contain both truth and myth, and the process is indeed not sterile nor in any way reduced. In fact many of the oral legends of great floods can be traced to very real catastrophic events like the oral legends of the Stone Age people in India whose stories saved them from the tidal wave, or the great river valley floods of China.



As for proof of the Bible - I find that all over the place. As it turns out, Nimrod did exist, and there was a great flood, and many other great things occured. Even the Babylonians knew this....why did you forget it? :wink:

My position is just as rational as yours, it merely starts with a different set of presuppositions.

Since my position is based only on the evidence and no other prior assuptions I believe that Occam's Razor would make a clean cut here.

[Ryokan]

Just for those who don't have the umpteen-volume set of myths!

Talk.origins has quite a list of flood stories here (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html).

It is indeed most widespread, and in many instances, there is a Noah stand-in.

Chesterton had a comment (which I cannot find) along the lines of MG's point here, "The reason we don't believe in a flood is because people in every culture remember it," or words to that effect...

Blessings,
Lee
Broach that point of view to GR Morton, and he will expound too you, at length, about how their is no evidence of any global flood, and that, while lacking evidence, you and Shunya may be on equal ground, but after looking at the geology....

[Meh_Gerbil]

Proof is an illusive quest, but I believe the evidence best supports my view.

I can honestly respect that, Shunyadragon.

Actually no, I base my case more on the available evidence. My only presuppositions in this case would be the evidence that is known and Occam's Razor.

Um...I think Occam's Razor would have us conclude that if several widely divergant cultures hold that there was once a flood of astounding proportions wherein a few people and animals survived that perhaps such a thing occurred.

It is beyond me why anyone would object to the majority of these myths having a common source - that is the simplist explanation by far.

[lao tzu]

I doubt there was even a worldwide flood... I think it's just natural to assume it was an account of the extreme water level rising around 10k bce. <snip> It could have flooded all the lowland areas nearly simultaneously to look like a worldwide flood.

Greetings, XC,

I believe it's probably simpler than that. The archeological evidence shows a number of localized catastrophic floods in the Mesopotamian flood plane dating back before 3000 BCE. They left silted out villages behind them. When new residents began to build again, they found evidence of a flood-silted village below them. Comparing stories with other villages in the area, they'd find they also were building on flood-silted precursors.

"Oh, this happened there too?"

Well, no. Something similar happened though.

Without modern archeological methods, it's unlikely they'd be able to tell that the different floods had occurred at different times, and natural to believe they were contemporary with each other. I can see how this would lead to the belief in a very large flood. An epic storytelling tradition would then create a leader who survived.

The largest problem for any c. 2500 BCE worldwide flood hypothesis is the fact the archeology says no such flood occurred. None of the localized catastrophic Mesopotamian floods occurred in that millenium.

As ever, Jesse

[lao tzu]

I believe that if a world wide flood occured that several cultures would speak of it - albeit it corrupted forms. I find that similar stories existing is actually a boost to my faith - I don't believe the stories are precursors. Oh my, Gerbil,

The Babylonian stories are written in a language that predates Hebrew, by a people who predate the Hebrews, in the region from which the Hebrews sprang according to their sacred texts, and refer to a time well before the flood related by biblical chronology. The obvious conclusion is that the Babylonian stories, which are the only stories that share large similarity in detail with the biblical stories, are almost certainly precursors.

That said, I hope you enjoy the stories for themselves, independent of how they intersect with your faith. It's always fascinating to me to see tales from our early history. I'm glad you share this interest.

As ever, Jesse

[shunyadragon]

You need to decide if these myths evolved from a common source (teh Bible came from Babylon!!!!!!) or if they are based on local unique events.

This a confusing response. The local or regional events for Biblical floods would most likely be the Tigris and Euphraties valleys where Taoist noted that there is a great deal of evidence for many local catastrophic floods. My reference was to other oral myths and legends around the world that many are known to be associated with local and regional events, and not a world flood.

I never said that the Bible came from Babylon. I said that Genesis is a synthesis of oral myths and legends with some facts that has origins in the Babylonian myths and legends influenced collected during the captivity of the Hebrews in exile.

It seems to me that you want to get away from all/most of the ancient flood myths having a single source because that would indicate a single event (oh no!) but when it comes to the Bible you want to exclude the possibility of a unique event in favor of claiming the Bible has it's precursor in Babylonian myth.

No, there is significant evidence that many of the oral legends referred to specific local and regional events and definitely not a world flood, because the mountains were not covered. There is absolutely no corraborating evidence for a world flood other than some of the oral legends, which by their nature are not reliable testimony for what takes place all over the world.

I suppose it can be whatever it needs to be, eh?

No, the evidence overwhelmingly supports no world flood.

Incidently, the flood myths I've been reading are too similar to be from unique sources - they aren't talking about just any flood, they are talking about THE FLOOD. A guy saves just a few people and all the animals in a boat and lets doves free to check for dry land? Some of the elements are just too similar for there to be seperate sources.

This is not true of all the oral myths and legends, and you must remember a catastrophic local or regional flood very much appears to cover the whole world from the limited worldview of ancient peoples, which is actually what the oral legend of the Indian Stone Age tribe that survived the tidal wave. To their ancestors it was a world flood that only a few survived that heded the warnings and fled.

[shunyadragon]

I can honestly respect that, Shunyadragon.



Um...I think Occam's Razor would have us conclude that if several widely divergant cultures hold that there was once a flood of astounding proportions wherein a few people and animals survived that perhaps such a thing occurred.

It is beyond me why anyone would object to the majority of these myths having a common source - that is the simplist explanation by far.

No, since there is not any other evidence for a world flood, many of the oral legends did not refer to a world flood, and it is well none that local and catastrophic events would appear to impact the whole world from the perspective of an ancient people.

If both scenarios possibly fit the evidence, Occam's Razor would chose the simplist option. A world flood is not a simple option to justify based on all the evidence. The evidence would probably favor local catastrophies before Occam's Razor made the cut.

[Yakkity Yak]

Babylonian Myths and the Flood story of The Gilgamesh Epic, have very different meanings from Noah's flood.

Here is an excellent resource with quoted summary:

In 1853, the archaeologist Austen Henry Layard and his team were excavating the palace library of the ancient Assyrian capital Nineveh. Among their finds were a series of 12 tablets of a great epic. The tablets dated from about 650 BC, but the poem was much older. The hero, Gilgamesh, according to the Sumerian King List, was a king of the first dynasty of Uruk who reigned for 126 years.

However, in the legend, Gilgamesh is 2/3 divine and 1/3 mortal. He has enormous intelligence and strength, but oppresses his people. The people call upon the gods, and the sky-god Anu, the chief god of the city, makes a wild man called Enkidu with enough strength to match Gilgamesh. Eventually the two fight, but neither can win. Their enmity becomes mutual respect then devoted friendship.

The two new friends set off on adventures together, but eventually the gods kill Enkidu. Gilgamesh grievously mourns his friend, and realizes that he too must eventually die. However, he learns of one who became immortal—Utnapishtim, the survivor of a global Flood. Gilgamesh travels across the sea to find Utnapishtim, who tells of his remarkable life.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/0329gilgamesh.asp

[shunyadragon]

Babylonian Myths and the Flood story of The Gilgamesh Epic, have very different meanings from Noah's flood.

Here is an excellent resource with quoted summary:

In 1853, the archaeologist Austen Henry Layard and his team were excavating the palace library of the ancient Assyrian capital Nineveh. Among their finds were a series of 12 tablets of a great epic. The tablets dated from about 650 BC, but the poem was much older. The hero, Gilgamesh, according to the Sumerian King List, was a king of the first dynasty of Uruk who reigned for 126 years.

However, in the legend, Gilgamesh is 2/3 divine and 1/3 mortal. He has enormous intelligence and strength, but oppresses his people. The people call upon the gods, and the sky-god Anu, the chief god of the city, makes a wild man called Enkidu with enough strength to match Gilgamesh. Eventually the two fight, but neither can win. Their enmity becomes mutual respect then devoted friendship.

The two new friends set off on adventures together, but eventually the gods kill Enkidu. Gilgamesh grievously mourns his friend, and realizes that he too must eventually die. However, he learns of one who became immortal—Utnapishtim, the survivor of a global Flood. Gilgamesh travels across the sea to find Utnapishtim, who tells of his remarkable life.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/0329gilgamesh.asp

This is roughly true, but what would be your point here? That does not discount the fact the the Pentateuch OT was most likely compiled by Jews in exile from a syntheis of Jewish and Babylonian legends and one of those is the flood myth. Virtually all archeological evidence and textural evidence supports this, and the fact that we totally lack any evidence of a scrape of text older than this, in fact all the known texts are considerably younger.

[drachronicler]

I think what I would find distressing is if we could go back to the most ancient of literature and find absolutely no concept of sacrifice or a world wide flood, or a great dragon struggling against the higher gods or a messiah figure. No, the OT and the NT are woven into the very fabric of human culture because they are true - and well understood by the oldest of cultures.

The struggle between the Dragon and the Most High is something everyone gets - even the Babylonians - it is only modern man that has educated himself in to ignorance.

Meh Gerbil,
I think you may want to read your Babylonian legends a little more carefully before jumping to the conclusion they are in harmony with modern mainstream Christian beliefs for such is not the case. For example, there is no "struggle" between the Dragon and the Higher God in the oldest recorded of all Adam-Serpent-Tree stories In this one, "Adape is offered eternal life by a talking dragon who guards the tree of immortality and is the servant of the high God. Adape doesn't accept and loses his chance of immortality.

Ironically this extremely ancient tale closely parallels the original OT concept of Satan as a servant of God, as confirmed in Job, and not the dramatically opposite NT concept of Satan which came about with pagan zoroarastrain dualism that influenced the post exile Jewish literature, and ultimately the Christian New Testament with its Revelation battle between Micahel and Satan copied verbatim from Persian Mythology, with only the change of names. But though much older than the New Testament, these legends are not as old as the Adape one which paints the "dragon" as an obedient servant creature as does the Old Testament.

So you can pick and choose which near-eastern parallel legends you like, to parallel either the OT or NT, which do indicate opposing views as rrelions evolve. On the subject of Biblical dragons, the best known one is an obedient servant in the oldest Sumerian legends, (just like the OT), and later Persian legends the dragon is the opposer, and curiously, we see exactly the same thing in Revelations, worded almost exactly the same as the later Persian legend.