"Both in form and content, the Biblical books bear no little resemblance to the literatures created

by earlier civilizations in the Near East...one can only marvel at what has been well termed "the
Hebrew miracle," which transformed the static motifs and conventionalized patterns of their
predecessors into what is perhaps the most vibrant and dynamic literary creation known to man.
The literature created by the Sumerians left its deep impress on the Hebrews, and one of the
thrilling aspects of reconstructing and translating Sumerian belles-lettres consists in tracing
resemblances and parallels between Sumerian and Biblical motifs."
(pp. 143-144. "Paradise. The First Biblical Parallels." Samuel Noah Kramer. History Begins At
Sumer: Twenty-seven "Firsts" in Man's Recorded History. Garden City, New York. Doubleday
Anchor Books. 1959. First edition published by The Falcon's Wing Press in 1956):

"Did the Hebrews borrow from Babylon? Neither an affirmative nor a negative reply to the
question can be absolutely discounted in the light of present knowledge. Reconstructions of a
process whereby Babylonian myths were borrowed by the Hebrews, having been transmitted by
the Canaanites, and "purged" of pagan elements remain imaginary. It has yet to be shown that
any Canaanite material was absorbed into Hebrew sacred literature on such a scale or in such a
way. Babylonian literature itself was known in Palestine at the time of the Israelite conquest and
so could have been incorporated directly. The argument that borrowing must have taken place
during the latter part of the second millennium B.C. because so many Babylonian texts of that
age have been found in Anatolia, Egypt, and the Levant, cannot carry much weight, being based
on archaeological accident. The sites yielding the texts were either deserted or destroyed at that
time, resulting in the burial of "librarie" and archives intact. Evidence does exist of not
inconsiderable Babylonian scribal influence earlier (e.g., at Alakah and Byblos).
However, it has yet to be shown that there was borrowing, even indirectly. Differences between
the Babylonian and Hebrew traditions can be found in factual details of the Flood narrative...and
are most obvious in the ethical and religious concepts of each composition. All who suspect or
suggest borrowing by the Hebrews are compelled to admit large-scale revisionism, alteration,
and re-interpretaion in a fashion which cannot be substaniated for any other composition from
the Ancient Near East...If there was borrowing then it can have extended only so far as the
"historical" framework, and not included intention or interpretation...The two accounts [Hebrew
and Mesopotamian] undoubtedly describe the same Flood, the two schemes relate the same
sequence of events. If judgement is to be passed as to the priority of one tradition over the
other, Genesis inevitably wins for its probability in terms of meterology, geophysics and timing
alone...In that the patriarch Abraham lived in Babylonia, it could be said that the stories were
borrowed from there, but not that they were borrowed from any text now known to us."
(pp.127-128. A. R. Millard. "Observations on the Babylonian and Hebrew Accounts Compared."
in his article "A New Babylonian "Genesis" Story."pp. 114-128. Richard S. Hess and David
Toshio Tsumra. Editors. "I Studied Inscriptions from before the Flood," Ancient Near Eastern,
Literary, and Linguistic Approaches to Genesis 1-11. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. 1994.
ISBN 0-931464-88-9)

Professor Bernard F. Batto (1992):

"This book is about myth and mythmaking in the Bible...The thesis upon which this book is
predicated is that myth is one of the chief mediums by which biblical writers did their
theologizing. Rather than trying to read myth out of the Bible as many in the past have done, I
intend to demonstrate that myth permeates virtually every layer of biblical tradition from the
earliest to the latest. Texts from all periods and of virtually every literary genre reveal that biblical
writers borrowed old myths and extended their meaning in novel ways for the purpose of

expressing new theological insights...the so-called Primeval History (Genesis 1-11) is heavily
dependent upon the mythic tradition of Mesopotamia."
(pp. 1-2. "Introduction." Bernard F. Batto. Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical
Tradition. Louisville, Kentucky. Westminster/John Knox Press. 1992):
Dr. Ewa Wasileska Ph.D. (2000):
"There is no doubt that Genesis and other parts of the Pentateuch borrowed heavily from the
polytheistic traditions of the region...it is quite obvious that the Sumerian contributions to the
continuous development of the Middle Eastern religious systems cannot be overlooked by
anyone who wants to be an objective researcher of truth. They include, among others, such
important concepts and symbols as...creation of the universe and humankind, universal deluge,
existence of a paradise, a sacral tree, special relationship between snakes and women, and so
forth."
(pp. 25-26. "In Search of Foundation: The Sumerian Origin." Ewa Wasilewska. Creation Stories
of the Middle East. London & Philadelphia. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 2000, reprint: 2005)

Lambert and Millard on ancient writer's having no qualms about recasting and plagiarizing
earlier compositions:
"...the ancient world had no proper titles, no sense of literary rights, and no aversion to what we
call plagiarism. Succeeding ages often rewrote old texts to suit new language forms and tastes."
(p. 5. "Introduction." W. G. Lambert & A. R. Millard. Atra-Khasis, The Babylonian Story of the
Flood. 1969 Oxford University Press. Reprint: 1999. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns.)

"The serpent that played so deplorable a part in the garden of Eden was almost certainly
Sumerian or Babylonian in its mythical origins, though the Biblical story was probably based on
a misunderstanding of the original source."
(p. 313. Michael Rice. The Archaeology of the Arabian Gulf, Circa 5000-323 B.C. London.
Routledge. 1994)

"No one familiar with the mythologies of the primitive, ancient, and Oriental worlds can turn to
the Bible without recognizing COUNTERPARTS on every page, TRANSFORMED, however, TO
RENDER AN ARGUMENT CONTRARY TO THE OLDER FAITHS. (p. 9. "The Serpent's Bride."
Joseph Campbell. The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology. Arkana. New York. Viking Penguin
Books. 1964, 1991 reprint)