07 February 2025
Now we look at parallels between the Bible and ancient epics (non-royal). According to Walton, the Bible Patriarchs were not royals. I would argue that Abraham was treated as high nobility, but the point is that the Patriarchal Narratives come closer to the epics than just about anything else, and certainly more than the extant archive literature.
Some of the epics were in verse, whereas a few, along with Genesis, used elevated prose (very proper grammar adhering to protocols). The comparison reverses when we notice that the Bible and poetic epics use the third person narrative, while the prose epics were first person.
Regarding the supernatural, Walton notes there are very few formal prayers in the biblical text, plus a few conversations initiated by God. Very few epics have an prayers. While God speaks often in the Bible, it's a little less common in the epics. Theophany is rather ambiguous in Scripture, and it's the same in the epics. The problem with Scripture is the vast amount of debate over the doctrine of theophany itself.
In the Bible, very seldom does anyone exhibit fantastic strength, but we do have unusual longevity. This is reversed in the epics, where heroes are often "superhuman" but not so long-lived. If there is a Hebrew hyperbole, it seems even more prevalent in other languages regarding physical capabilities. There is only one miracle in the Patriarchal Narratives (Isaac's conception) and none in the epics.
Scenes in the divine realm are not common in Scripture (though arguably may be recorded in highly symbolic language), and are absent from the first-person epics, but very common in the other epics. This is what gives some epics the feel of mythology. By the same token, crossing the barrier between the divine and mundane is common in those same epics, missing from the first-person epics and infrequent in the Bible.
In terms of historical setting, it's been nearly impossible to match the patriarchs with any external evidence. However, the names seem authentic and the geography is well attested. The Patriarchal Narratives depict ordinary people and events, while the epics tend to represent the extraordinary. None of the contemporary epics cover multiple generations the way the Bible does. Thus, we note that the Bible narrative has a distinct sense of purpose, recording the history of revelation, that is lacking in the epics.
Thus, while the epics and archives show some broad similarities with the Patriarchal Narratives, the literary form for the latter stands unique.
Walton hedges his bets just a little in comparing the Adapa epic with the story of Adam in Genesis. Both recount a food-based test that the main characters failed, losing immortality and passing mortality onto the human race. By contrast, Adapa is deceived in being told not to eat something that gave immortality, which is the opposite of what happened with Adam.
These two examples diverge radically in terms of morals. Adapa obeyed and was deceived; Adam was deceived and disobeyed. Adapa's deity is no morally different from any human. Adapa's world is what it ought to be and cannot be changed, but Adam's world is not at all what it ought to be and man is now estranged from God by sin, but there is hope for change. These are huge differences that many scholars ignore.
Thus, there is still debate over whether there is any level of borrowing or if the two developed independently. The bibliography at the end of this chapter is very short.
This document is public domain; spread the message.