Biblical Monothiesm

The monotheistic revolution viewed through the lens of Genesis 1-9

Note: This post is of a different style than my regular posts. Instead of examining some of the tenets of Judaism from the view of an insider, it offers a small window into the understanding of Judaism prevalent in modern-day scholarship. I hope this can help offer some perspective. I would love to receive feedback if you would like more posts like these.

Biblical mythology was heavily influenced by the broader Ancient Near East context in which it was written, yet simultaneously maintained a distinct flavor and greatly differing theology. Its narratives bear great similarities to the narratives in the cultures surrounding its authors, and its theological messages seem to be modeled in the format that was accepted in those times. At the same time, it represents a radical departure from the religions and myths of its neighbors, and the legacy the Bible has left is a powerful testament to its unique message. How can these two contradictory notions coexist? Is the Bible a revolutionary text, or is it simply another product of the ANE?

To answer this question, let us trace several key aspects of Biblical theology and mythology in comparison to the major Mesopotamian mythological texts that we have; namely the Enuma Elish, the Epic of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis.

The narratives of the Genesis creation and flood myths bear striking similarities to the myths found in Mesopotamian literature. For the former, Creation is presented as a process of a divine being imposing order on the face of chaos. In both corpuses, the primordial state is one of a formless existence, without divisions such as heaven and earth or dark and light, and without productive activity such as vegetation, life, and humans.¹ Our world begins with a supreme deity creating these divisions and setting these processes in motion.² He does so for the purpose of creating humans to work the land and partake in existence.³  The formless existence in both is represented through undivided water, humans are formed from a mixture of clay and divine spirit, and the heavens are created through separating the upper waters from the lower waters.

However, although the narratives take the same shape, there are several significant differences. While in the Bible God is presented as existing together with the primordial chaos,⁴ in the other myths the gods themselves arise out of this chaos.⁵ While in the Bible the supreme deity creates the world on his own without conflict,⁶ in the other myths he must first battle the other deities to achieve supremacy.⁷ And while in the Bible humans are to work (and rule) the land for their own benefit by virtue of being in the image of God,⁸ in the other myths it is for the purpose of relieving the gods of their own toil.⁹

These are not minor variations, but rather represent a religious revolution which diverges from the central themes and beliefs of ANE cultures. The Bible emerged from the polytheistic landscape and established the radical doctrine of monotheism.¹⁰ Monotheism is not simply reducing the number of gods until only one remains; it is a fundamentally different conception of what divinity is. The gods are no longer a part of the world, who came into being together with it,¹¹ are limited by their own nature,¹² and very much act in a manner similar to humans. Rather, God is a preexistent being who exists beyond nature, creates all of nature on his own, and does not partake in human-like activities or faults.¹³ It follows from this that humans are not merely a tool with which to fulfill divine desires, rather they were created with their own purpose, and this is exemplified through them being created in the divine image.

This fundamental difference also affects the understanding of the concept of divinity in general. For a polytheist, the gods are separate from humans by virtue of their divine qualities. This allows a human to achieve divinity if he were to reach such qualities, as illustrated in the character of Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.¹⁴ However, in the biblical view, God is fundamentally of a different nature, and there cannot be an intermediate to bridge the gap between human and the divine.¹⁵ At the same time, many divine qualities are described in the Bible in a comparable manner to how they are described in pagan literature of the milieu in which it was written,¹⁶ and its authors drew inspiration from.

This also affects the theology surrounding religious worship. In the Mesopotamian religious texts worship is simply to appease the gods and win them over for human benefit, while in the bible divine worship contains intrinsic value, and is for the purpose of building and maintaining a covenantal relationship with God. Additionally, for the ANE polytheist the gods’ responses are rooted self-interest which can at times be capricious or unjust, while the Biblical God is just, and his actions are always righteous. Nevertheless, this does not preclude the Bible from describing God’s actions or motivations in very human-like terms,¹⁷ reflecting the environment from which these ideas emerged.

When reading the texts related to the flood myth a similar theme becomes clear. The outline of the story in Genesis strongly mirrors the Mesopotamian versions, suggesting a common source or cultural borrowing. A god decides to bring a flood to destroy humanity, and one man is selected to survive. He is warned to build a boat and save himself and some animals. When the flood ends, he sends out birds to ascertain it is safe to leave, and when the dove fails to return, he exits into the destroyed world. He then brings a sacrifice after which the deity regrets bringing the flood.¹⁸ However, although the form is the same, the theological messages differ greatly. In the Mesopotamian myths Enlil acts out of annoyance with humans,¹⁹ his plot is diverted by Ea/Enki who thwarts his plan and saves the person,²⁰ and Enlil is later condemned by the other gods who refuse to allow him to partake in the sacrifices.²¹ The message in the Bible could not be more different. Gods decides to destroy humanity due to their extreme wickedness, saves Noah by merit of his righteousness, and is appeased by the sacrifices and regrets his actions. While the Babylonian pantheon is presented as various conflicting gods who each have their own interests, the Biblical YHWH is an omnipotent deity who interacts with humans justly based on the merit of their actions.

This comparison illustrates the paradoxical nature of Biblical monotheism. Its stories are typical of the broader ANE, its language and often conception is in line with polytheistic mythology, yet throughout, it maintains its unique message. While it is clearly a product of the world in which it was written, nevertheless, it transcends and molds that very world towards the particular direction that the Bible established. This subtle yet powerful difference set the stage for a radical religious revolution in the millennia to come.

1. Gen. 1:2; 2:5; Enuma Elish I 1-7

2. Gen. 1:1-2, 4, 7, 11, 20, 24, 27; Enuma Elish IV 138-142

3. Gen. 1:28; 2:16; 9:1, 7; Atrahasis I 240-243

4. Gen. 1:2; Enuma Elish I 1-4

5. Enuma Elish I 7-10

6. Gen. 1:7; Neh. 9:5; compare Atrahasis I 225-234

7. Enuma Elish IV 93-146; Atrahasis I 57-62, 208

8. Gen. 1:26-29

9. Atrahasis I 1-6; 240-243; BM 78257 II 9-12; K 6632 V 4-6

10. Deut. 4:35, 6:4

11. See Enuma Elish I 7-10

12. See Enuma Elish IV 125-130; Atrahasis III 21-22; Gilgamesh XI 79-80

13. Num. 23:19; Isa. 55:8

14. Gilgamesh XI 203-204; see Atrahasis I 208-217

15. See Ex. 33:23

16. Gen. 3:8

17. Gen. 8:21; Ex. 20:5

18. Gen. 5:5-8:22; Atrahasis III; Gilgamesh XI 8-198

19. Atrahasis I 356-359; II 1-8

20. Atrahasis III 15-19

21. Atrahasis III 34-35