205. He took me and caused me to dwell afar off at the mouth of the rivers.
2. Comparison with Genesis 6-9.
The above account of the deluge so closely resembles that in the Bible (Gen. 6:9-9:19), that nearly all scholars recognize that they are two versions of the same narrative.[399] In each case there is a divine revelation to the hero of the deluge that a catastrophe is coming of which every one else is ignorant. They both relate the building of the vessel, the “pitching it within and without with pitch,” the embarkation, the flood in which other men are destroyed, the resting of the ship on a mountain, the sending out of the birds, the disembarkation, the sacrifice, and the intimation that in future a deluge shall not be.
When the Babylonian account is compared with the Biblical, there are two striking differences. 1. The Babylonian story makes the flood local; the Biblical, general. 2. The Babylonian story, fascinating poetry though it is, has a conception of deity in strong contrast with the dignity of the Biblical monotheism. The Babylonian gods disagree; they blame each other; they crouch with fear like dogs; they come swarming about the sacrifice like hungry flies! Nothing could more strikingly illustrate the inspiration of the Biblical story than to measure it against the background of this Babylonian poem, which is clearly a variant version of it.
3. Another Babylonian Version.
From the library of Ashurbanipal there has come another version of the deluge, which represents the purpose of its coming as different. According to this version, men had sinned and had been afflicted with famine, after which they reformed for a time. The famine was removed, but soon, apparently, they sinned again. Pestilence was then sent upon them. An appeal brought mitigation of their sufferings, but soon they plunged into sin again. This time they were punished with unfruitfulness of the land and of their race, but soon sinned as before. When all other punishments had failed, as a last resort the flood was sent.
As this account does not so closely resemble that in Genesis, it is not translated here. Those who wish to read it are referred to Rogers, Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament, New York, 1912, p. 114, ff.