Are There Really Parallels Between Genesis and Gilgamesh

Garden of Eden

In the biblical account, Eden seems to be a vast place with the eastern portion called a garden (Genesis 2:8–10), but it was also filled with fruit trees (Genesis 2:9 and 2:16). Adam was to tend (some versions say “till”) the garden, and although not directly mentioned, it is assumed that Eve would have done the same, as Adam’s helpmate. Adam and Eve were created perfect and sinless and given the vegetables and fruit of the trees in the garden for their sustenance. During whatever limited time they were in Eden before the fall, they did not sin. The animals in Eden were also vegetarian, so there was no sin, death, or bloodshed before Adam’s transgression of God’s command (Genesis 1:31).

The garden of Eden was aptly named garden, as God’s command to Adam to work and keep it (Genesis 2:15) was to allow Adam and Eve to eat of its produce; and it is also likely that whatever animals were in the garden also ate there too, probably grass and other green plants (Genesis 1:30). Additionally, God placed the tree of life in the middle (or midst) of the garden for Adam and Eve to eat of. This may have been the overarching purpose of the garden, and had they obeyed God, not sinned, and eaten from the tree of life, they would have stayed sinless and would not have died (c.f. Genesis 3:22).

Sacred Cedar Forest

In stark contrast, the “Edenic” forest of the Epic of Gilgamesh is called “the gods’ dwelling place, the goddesses’ exalted abode.” Already we see that there is not one God but many in the Babylonian account. The trees bore entangled thorns, which formed an entwined canopy, but Scripture indicates that thorns were made as a consequence of the fall (Genesis 3:17–18). In addition to cedars, cypress trees were also in this forest, and all of them reached lofty heights. The forest “is described as idyllic, lavishly appointed, and luxuriant.” It is also forbidden for mortals to enter the forest.

But seemingly out of nowhere, Gilgamesh and Enkidu decide to kill Humbaba (the caretaker god or demon of the garden as he is variously portrayed) and his seven sons, called “radiances” and described with onomatopoetic terms as baby birds. On the newly found tablet, much is made of the birds in the forest giving warnings to Gilgamesh and Enkidu that they should “go away” and that they “have sinned.” Then after killing Humbaba and his sons, Gilgamesh and Enkidu then proceed to cut down a lofty cedar, “whose top reached to heaven.” The interesting choice of wording there is reminiscent not of Eden but of Babel (Genesis 11:4). After their murderous spree and their desecration of the forest, “Enkidu worries out loud to Gilgamesh about what they have done, saying, . . . ‘we have made the Forest a wasteland!’”

No Real Parallels but Lots of Differences

While the author of the article wants to force parallels between the biblical account in Genesis 1–3, the reality is that there are only differences, which should be apparent to anyone who adheres to biblical authority and historicity. His two “parallels” are quoted below:

In Genesis 2–3, the man and woman are placed in a divine garden only to desecrate it and invite the curse of God on the ground, serpent, and all wild beasts (Genesis 3:14, 17). Also, in the Epic of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh and Enkidu enter the Cedar Forest, only to transgress against this divine abode and thereby desecrate it and the creatures within.

Both the Book of Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh describe a paradise that is beautiful and bountiful—but then lost. And, in both texts, humans’ short stay in a divine abode carries serious consequences. By eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden, humans come to experience death. By cutting down the lofty cedar and killing Humbaba and his younglings, Gilgamesh and Enkidu destroy paradise, and eventually, Enkidu pays for this transgression with his life. The texts then grapple with how to live in the resultant world of death, pain, and discord.1

While the author of the article wants to force parallels between the biblical account in Genesis 1–3, the reality is that there are only differences, which should be apparent to anyone who adheres to biblical authority and historicity.

In stark contrast to these alleged parallels is the biblical account, which states that the garden of Eden was made for man, not forbidden to him (Genesis 2:15–16). It was in Eden where God created Eve and brought her to Adam, and they became husband and wife—one flesh (Genesis 2:21–25). In the Epic of Gilgamesh, two men enter the garden and decide to murder the caretakers and then desecrate the forest. Interestingly, earlier passages in the Epic of Gilgamesh hint that the gods are displeased with Gilgamesh because of his harsh rule over his land of Uruk. “As a result, the gods create a rival for him, Enkidu,” who is supposed to curb Gilgamesh’s abuses of power.2 But Gilgamesh and Enkidu appear to quickly become friends, and both decide to journey to the sacred forest, which is forbidden to them. Instead of two people (a man and a woman) created perfectly and living in harmony (for a while at least) with themselves and God, we see two men, one of which at least had already sinned against others, who now decide to go somewhere where they are not supposed to go and then murder and desecrate that forest. We see sin piled upon sin in the Gilgamesh epic, before the “resultant world of death, pain, and discord” even came about.

Genesis (and later Scripture) is quite clear that Adam’s one sin (disobeying God’s direct command) resulted in the fall and the subsequent curse on the ground and animals, as well as physical and physiological changes (Genesis 3:14–19; Romans 5:12, 8:20–22; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22). Genesis and all of Scripture are quite clear that there is only one God (in three persons), not many gods and goddesses (Deuteronomy 6:4; Psalm 96:5; Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 1 Timothy 2:5), nor were there hundreds (or thousands) of people on the earth when the first sin occurred (living in separate kingdoms, like the city of Uruk): there were only two—Adam and Eve.

Conclusion

While the author claims that there are many parallels between the Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis 1–3, other than a few topically similar concepts, the bulk of his contentions have vast theological differences between the two. If many people existed at the time of Gilgamesh and had not yet sinned, as implied by the text which states that “death, pain and discord” did not happen until after Gilgamesh and Enkidu entered the sacred forest and killed its guardians, then why are they punished for his sin? Indeed, Gilgamesh seems to get off easy, as it is Enkidu who is later killed for their desecration. But Scripture teaches that one man’s sin (the first man, Adam, from whom we’re all descended) brought death, disease, and a curse, and that is why one man (the Lord, Jesus Christ) had to die for the sins of the world.

These two texts could not be more different. Man was created as a perfect being and fell through direct disobedience. That is why all of Adam and Eve’s progeny are placed under the curse, for all have sinned (Romans 3:23). The Epic of Gilgamesh teaches that man was created imperfect, able to be cruel and defy their gods even before the world was cursed. In the biblical case, we have a remedy for Adam’s and our sin—Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. In the Gilgamesh epic, people have to hopelessly “grapple with how to live in the resultant world of death, pain, and discord.”