Mesopotamia Creation Stories and Biblical Creation Story - Essay Example

Mesopotamia Creation Stories: Similarities &Differences to the Biblical Creation Story Introduction All human societies have creation stories to describe how the cosmos began, and how humankind came to be and our purpose in this universe. Mesopotamian and Biblical stories of creation have been compared to determine elements of similarity and difference to determine what is unique to each culture in terms of theological and cosmological interpretations. Many Wetern societies are founded on Christian principles, and so insightful reading of the Bible requires knowledge of the ancient societies and cultures that produced the literary forms of Bible creation stories that guide many of the Western principles in 21st century society. This is because a text's genre serves to channel writers and readers by providing a common ground to determine the production and interpretation of specific texts. Biblical and Mesopotamian creation stories are linguistically, culturally, and historically very different from modern day ways of thinking, experiencing and interpreting the world. So as to correctly as possible interpret the writings of Genesis it is necessary to school oneself in other Near Eastern creation stories. The present paper will compare and contrast Mesopotamian creation stories with that of the Bible. Firstly, the creation story, "Epic of Creation" will be used to develop the Mesopotamian interpretation of how the cosmos and humankind came to be. Secondly, the Biblical interpretation of creation of this universe and humans will be presented. Next, issues of translation will be addressed. Finally, a conclusion shall synthesize the main arguments of the paper, and demonstrate the critical need for comparative analysis of creation stories in the Near East. Mesopotamian Stories of Creation The Mesopotamian myth of creation is quite violent, especially with regard to later civilizations, such as Egypt, and the later Biblical Creation Story. In itself, this aspect of violence reflects the high level of violence both in the physical and social fabric of Mesopotamian society, as depicted in the poem "Epic of Creation" (i.e., Enuma Elish): Everything originated with water. From the mixture of sweet water, Apsu, with salt water, Tiamat, the gods arose, Apsu and Tiamat gave birth to Mummu, to tumult of the waves, and to Lakhmu and Lakhamu, a pair of gigantic serpents. In turn these serpents produced Anshar, the heavens, and Kishar, the earthly world. And from these two came the great gods, Anu, Enlil, and Ea, as well as the other gods of the sky, earth, and the underworld. Many of these new gods were noisy, which upset Apsu and Tiamat, since they could not rest. These primordial goddesses then discussed whether they should annihilate their progeny. When Ea, the all-knowing, learned of Apsu's plan to destroy the gods he used his magic to capture her and Mummu. Tiamat was furious and created a monstrous army of gods and freak creatures to punish Ea and his cohorts. Ea went to his father Anshar, and Anshar advised him to send Anu to fight Tiamat. But both Anu and Ea were afraid of the goddess and her army. Then Ea called Marduk forth. Marduk promised to conquer Tiamat if he were given supreme authority over the gods. The gods agreed that he was to have lordship scepter, the throne, and an invincible weapon. Armed with bow and arrows, lightning, the winds, a hurricane, and a special net, Marduk rode forth to meet Tiamat in his chariot, which was a tempest, drawn by four fearsome steeds. They clashed and Marduk caught Tiamat in his net. When she opened her mouth to swallow him, Marduk let loose the hurricane, which filled her jaws and belly, thereby stunning her. The Marduk shot an arrow into her belly and killed her. Tiamat's army fled in confusion at her downfall, but Marduk caught them in his net, chained them, and cast them into the underworld. As he was cutting up Tiamat's body, Marduk conceived a plan. From one half he made the dome of the heavens, and with the other half he made the earth. He established the dwelling of the gods, fixed the positions of the stars, ordered the movements of the heavenly bodies, and set the length of the year. Then to gladden the hearts of the gods Marduk created men from the blood of Kingu, the general of Tiamat's army. Finally, he made rivers, vegetation, and animals, which completed the creation. In recognition of his triumphs the gods bestowed all of their titles and powers on Marduk, making him the God of Gods (Dalley, 1998). The afore mentioned creation story is found on tablet one of the sacred texts, and the remaining 6 tablets speak of the ordering of the created cosmos. It is evident from these tablets that the concepts of theology and cosmogony were, in Mesopotamia, the same thing. So that stories of creation also involved stories of how the gods came to be; whereas, the Bible's creation stories assume the already present one God, and instead describe how the Earth, rest of the universe, and creatures upon it, including humans, came to be (Tsumura, 1989). Archeological research shows that there is little evidence that Mesopotamians cultivated an interest in cosmogony (Lambert, 1980). There is little available that describes how the physical universe came into form and took on life, unlike the Bible that focuses on this very topic. Although, the great interest in the genealogical lines of Mesopotamian gods often did have cosmogenic associations. Also clear, is that there is not one solitary Mesopotamian story of creation; the previously cited creation myth being just one tradition which gods were the makers of what came to be (Dalley, 1998; Moran, 1970). For Mesopotamian creation stories, the actual ordering of the universal elements is given precedence over the creation experience. Many texts, such as "The Epic of Creation" commit only a few initial lines on their tablets to the universe being created, the remainder of the writings focus on universal organization (Williams, 2007). In fact, some texts focus only on the ordering of the universe, such as "Enki and Sumer", it is also difficult to find any text that provides a description of the gods "creating" (i.e., bringing an item or creature into being). Instead, the texts highlight how the gods separate, manipulate or reproduce. For example, in the above "Epic of Creation", Marduk "creates" the sky from the corpse of the fallen Tiamat. All that came to be came from the ocean water, so that it is made clear that all that comes into existence does so from something already in existence, as such, this is not the true definition of creation, in the sense that something novel that has not been in being before has come to be. The origins and creation as described in Ancient Mesopotamia highlights the diversity in specific elements of different creation stories from this region. However, it is also clear that there are elements that overlap. Each recorded account emphasized the central part that gods have to play in the creation of the world and humans. Further, creation and ordering of the universe occurs by way of gods being formed. Any distinct differences between Mesopotamian creation stories appear to be due to geographical and historical causes, such as a god's name taking on attributes of the physical environment particular to a specific locale (Williams, 2007). Such differences can be seen in two interpretations of how humans came to be created (on the 6th tablet); 1) that they sprang from the earth (as from stories of the Nippur area; "Creation of the Hoe"); or 2) that they were formed through the mixture of clay and water or blood of a god (as from stories from Eridu; "Enki and Ninmah" and "When Anu Had Created the Heavens" are clay only, whereas "The Epic of Creation," and "The Epic of Atra-hasis" have blood and clay mixed) (Williams, 2007). However, the creation story "Cattle and Grain" mentions only that humans are "given breath". The use of the blood of a god has been argued to indicate that Mesopotamians considered humans to share in divine nature (Williams, 2007). Moran points to this act as implying that god and humans are together in the one body, "completely fused and copenetrating each other" (Moran, 1970: 48). Other scholars have attributed the giving of breath in "Cattle and Grain" as suggesting a similar concept (Williams, 2007). Hence, humans were interpreted by many Mesopotamians as sharing in the nature of godhood. This is very similar to the Biblical creation description of God making man in his image, and of breathing life into man. Overall, it appears that Mesopotamian and Biblical creation stories depict humans as part of nature, which in turn is the embodiment of God/gods. The dignity and meaningfulness of human life is also consistent across texts; notably they were formed to provide services to the gods. This dominant motif does though differ in degree of service across the creation story accounts. Whilst some tablets are not specific and generalize service to that of serving "food and drink" (i.e., "Chaldean Cosmogony," "Trilingual Creation Story," and "When Anu Had Created the Heavens"), others speak of more sever circumstances of service, such as hard labor (i.e., "Enki and Ninmah," "The Epic of Creation," and "Atra-hasis") (Saggs, 1978). Saggs, has also suggested that this depiction of human purpose functions as an indicator of social structures at the time, rather than an analogy of theology. As such, human service implies an underlying philosophy of gods needing humans, in contrast to Biblical creation stories that emphasizes humans needing their God. The Biblical Story of Creation The Biblical story of creation places the creation of humans as the pinnacle of creation within this cosmos (Genesis 1), whereas the later books focus on the situation of humans that first inhabited the earth (Tsumura, 1989) Genesis 1:2 presents the newly created world in a positive way with regards to it being at this time unproductive and un-inhabited. Genesis 2:5-6 describes the first days of the earth in a negative way in terms of stating it is not as yet productive when indicating that there is no vegetation and no humans. Similar to that of the Mesopotamian myth, the earth is completely enveloped by the waters of the ocean. In this sense, Genesis 1 can be considered a clear creation story in which waters cover the earth, and later, in Genesis 2, the waters separate and dry land makes appearance. Some state that Genesis 1 and 2 are contrasting creation stories; others claim that the stories although separate, overlap (Niditch, 1993). As to the latter, this reflects a similar pattern to that of Mesopotamian creation stories which tend to differ according to geographical location that is those from the North and those from the South. This "Double Creation of Mankind" has been compared with the myths of "Enki and Nimah" and the "Atra-Hasis Epic" of Mesopotamia (Kikawada, 1983). As such, Genesis 1 makes reference to the initial creation of humans and Genesis 2 makes reference to the "second" creation of humans that is the creation of specific humans in the form of Adam and Eve. In very similar ways, all these creation stories parallel each other. Further, many scholars accept that Genesis 1 presents a mythological foundation that includes the Babylonian goddess Tiamat, of the "Enuma elish" creation story, as the Hebrew the"m (Genesis 1:2) (ChristanAnswers.net, 1996). However, Lambert contends that the use of the"m (ocean) is not a phonological borrowing of Tiamat, the sea dragon which fights and wins over the storm-god Marduk; "The Hebrew teh"m "ocean" together with the Ugaritic thm, the Akkadian tiamtu, the Arabic tihamat, and the Eblaite ti-'...-ma-tum /tiham(a)tum/ is simply a reflection of a common Semitic term *tiham-" (Lambert, 1980: 46). Further, Lambert states that although the Hebrew texts of creation make note of "primeval" water, it is not enough to deduce that such reference implies Mesopotamian influence (Lambert 1980: 47). However, he does state that the horizontal division of cosmic waters has parallels in the Epic myth, although the issue of a battle taking place prior to the division of the waters by a God is unsupported. Hence, the Biblical story of creation by one absolute authority is unique to the creation stories in the Near East, and the element of light as the first act of creation appears to be only present in the Genesis text. Lambert goes on to note that neither Hebrew nor Mesopotamian texts provide enough evidence that a battle is part of the reason that the waters are divided; so that the story of Genesis can be considered as very different from the concept of "order from chaos" as described in the "Epic of Creation" (Lambert, 1980). Lambert contends that it is incorrect to assume that the "Epic of Creation" was adapted by later Israelites to develop the Genesis story of creation. This viewpoint has been accepted by other scholars, such as Sj"berg, who agree that there is a lack of evidence to support the idea that Israelites "borrowed" from Babylonian mythology (Sj"berg, 1984). He goes on to state that it is not logical to assume that Mesopotamian ideas moved westward to influence Old Testament scholars (Sj"berg, 1984). A distinct difference between the "Epic of Creation" and the Biblical story of creation is that in Genesis no female deity is mentioned, nor implied to exist, let alone involved in the creation of the universe and the bringing into being of humankind. In itself, such a creation story is considered unique amongst the ancient Near East writings. Another differentiating element is the use of the term "chaos" or toh- waboh- in Genesis 1:2, meaning "without form and void" (Tsumura, 1989). However, several scholars have noted that this term is different to that representing a primeval chaos as described in Mesopotamian creation stories, which is used to signify the opposition to "creation". Instead, chaos in the Genesis context is considered to refer to the "emptiness" or "bare" state of the earth before becoming inhabited with animals, humans and vegetation (Tsumura 1989). Tsumura goes on to describe the water-covered earth as being depicted by a pair of terms, toh- waboh- // hosek, or "not yet normal" which can be interpreted as the waters being uninhabited and so not yet productive, and without light. As such, the terms are argued to not indicate chaos in the way in which chaos is described in Mesopotamian texts. The distinct difference between Mesopotamian texts and the Biblical text is that a monolithic male God creates the cosmos from what does not exist previously. Turning now to the description of the creation of humankind within Genesis, the stories from Genesis 2-3 present the "Fall of Humans" from a state of grace, that does not appear in any of the Mesopotamian creation stories (Langille, 2003). The creation of humans from clay and through divine breath reflects similarities of some Mesopotamian creation stories. Batto (1992) suggests that the use of clay and divine breath represents humankinds' connection to the earth and nature, not dissimilar to the interpretations of Mesopotamian approaches. Also similar is that humans are brought forth from something already in existence, the earth, or clay. Humans also appear to have been created by God to serve him, by praising him, tilling the soil and caretaking his creatures. With reference to cultivation, humans and the earth are seen to be co-dependant, again reflecting interpretations of Mesopotamian text. It is interesting to note that scholars attribute the creator of Genesis 1, as behaving differently to the creator of Genesis 2, the former being omnipotent and the ultimate controller of all in the universe, he is seen as good and perfect, and so too is all that he creates (Langille, 2003). Whereas the creator of Genesis 2 is interpreted as unsure of what to expect form his creation the human, and the act of creation is described as being ambivalent and ambiguous in nature, more of a trial-and-error process (Batto, 1992). Reflections on Interpretations of Creation Stories Evidently, a numerous methodological issues arise when interpreting ancient texts, such as those from Mesopotamia (Williams, 2007). Firstly, there is a limited amount of clay tablets available for interpretation, and those that do exist are not often in their complete (i.e., unbroken) form. Secondly, those tablets that are in existence cover a wide range of historical and cultural time periods that there cannot be presented a single or uniform "Mesopotamian Creation Story". Across five thousand years and at a minimum two distinct groups of people and languages have made it necessary that the stories of creation be treated not as "one" and so cannot be analyzed as an absolute unity. Thirdly, there is an element of uncertainty as to how a 21st century student of religious and cultural history interprets the understandings of Mesopotamians who wrote the tablets in ca. 2000 - 1600 BCE. As opposed to the Bible, the primary motivation for most Ancient Mesopotamian writings is to exalt one god over another, or to explain human social organization, rather than present a systematic teaching of the creation of the cosmos and humans place within it. Conclusion In conclusion it is evident that many similarities and differences exist between the creation texts of Ancient Mesopotamia and the Bible. Whereas both describe first the origin of the universe and secondly it's ordering, Mesopotamian texts emphasize a range of gods involved in the processes, whereas the Bible emphasizes a solitary God. Interestingly, all the interpretations of creation presented in this paper attest to the inter-linking of divinity and humans, and so of humans to nature, as expressed through humans being fashioned from clay, and life being "breathed into" them. However, the importance of humans is made central to the Biblical text, to the extend that it is implied that the cosmos was brought into being to allow humans to exist, and in turn to bring praise and glory to God. In contrast, Mesopotamian texts indicate that humans are part of the creative process to alleviate the burdens of existence, such as cultivating the soil, form the gods. It is important to reflect on the how Biblical stories of creation came into existence, as distinguishing between Hebrew traditional culture and that shared with Ancient Mesopotamia and other Near East cultures can inform scholars as to what is distinct to each. As knowledge stands at present, many of the Biblical motifs distinguish its creation stories as unique amongst Near Easter creation stories. References Batto, B. F. (1992) Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition. Louisville, Kentucky, Westminster/John Knox Press. ChristanAnswers.net (1996) Genesis and Ancient Near Eastern Stories of Creation and the Flood: An introduction. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-c001.html Dalley, S. (1998) Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others (Oxford World's Classics). Oxford, Oxford University Press. Kikawada, I.M. (1983) The double creation of mankind in Enki and Ninmah, Atrahasis I 1-351, and Genesis 1-2. Iraq 45: 43-45. Langille, T. (2003) Myth making in the Bible and the Ancient Near East: The Yahwist primeval creation myth. Axis Mundi, 2002/2003 Articles: 1-12. Lambert, W. G. (1980) Babylonia and Israel. Theologische Realenzyklopdie [Translated] 5: 71-72 Moran, W. L. (1970) The Creation of Man in Atrahasis I 192-248. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 200: 48-56 Niditch, S. (1993) Folklore and the Hebrew Bible. New York, Fortress Press. Saggs, H. W. (1978) The Encounter With the Divine in Mesopotamia and Israel. Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion 12; London: University of London, Athlone Press. Sj"berg, A.W. (1984) Eve and the Chameleon. In The Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G.W. Ahlstr"m. Sheffield, JSOT Press. Tsumura, D. T. (1989) The Earth and waters in Genesis 1 and 2: A linguistic Investigation. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement 83. Williams, T. (2007) Codex. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from http://biblical-studies.ca/blog/wp/category/creation-in-ancient-mesopotamia/ Read More