The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
Lower part of the obverse of a terra-cotta tablet from Nineveh, inscribed
with the names of Babylonian kings in Sumerian and Semitic Babylonian. The
13th line (that running across two columns) has the statement, "These are
the kings who were after the Flood. They are not written in their proper
order." The names of Sargina (Sargon of Agadé) and Hammurabi (Amraphel)
also occur. Found by Sir A. H. Layard and Hormuzd Rassam.
CHAPTER III. THE FLOOD.
The Biblical account—Its circumstantial nature and its great
length—The Babylonian account—The reason of the Flood and why
Pir-napištim built the Ark—His devotion to the God Ea—Ea and
Jah—Ea’s antagonism to Bêl—The bloodless sacrifice—Ea’s gift of
immortality—Further observations—Appendix: The second version of
the Flood-story.
Noah, son of Lamech, had reached the age of five hundred years, and had
three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japhet; and at this time men had begun to
multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them; then
“the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, and they
took them wives of all that they chose.”
The question naturally arises, “Who were these sons of God?” According to
Job xxxviii. 7, where we have the statement that “The morning stars sang
together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy,” it would seem to be
the angels that are intended by these words, and this is apparently the
opinion generally held by scholars and divines on the subject. This view
seems to be favoured by the Second Epistle of Peter (ii. 1), though, as
the words do not actually agree with those of the text of Genesis quoted
above, nothing very positive can be maintained concerning the apostle’s
dictum—in fact, his words in the passage referred to, “for if God spared
not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them
into chains and darkness, to be reserved unto judgment,” can much more
reasonably be regarded as referring, and therefore giving authority to,
the story of the fall of the angels, as indicated in Avitus, Caedmon, and
Milton, a legend of which the germs are found in the Babylonian account of
the Creation, referred to in Chapter I. The other passages of Job where
this expression occurs (i. 6, and ii. 2) are not conclusive as to the
meaning “angels,” for the expressions “sons of God,” in those passages,
who are said to have come before the Almighty, may very well have been
merely men.
However the matter may stand, for the passages in Job, there is every
probability that it is not the angels that are intended in the description
we are examining as to the reasons of the coming of the Flood. As the late
George Bertin was the first to point out, the Babylonians often used the
phrase “a son of his god,” apparently to designate “a just man,” or
something similar. The connection in which this expression occurs is as
follows—
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account