TH BIBLE AND BABYLON V — THE BIBLICAL AND THE MESOPOTAMIAN VIEW OF THE UNIVERSE AND MAN

SUMERIAN AND BABYLONIAN VIEWS OF THE HEAVENS

The Babylonian view was that the gods made the universe, and cosmic bonds held it together. The tablet KAR 307 from the first millennium BCE describes three heavens that are made of stones (probably having stone floors), and three different levels of the earth.[1] The tablet contains different traditions. In one tradition, the Upper Heavens are the abode of the god Anu, the Middle Heavens are the abode of the 300 Igigi gods, and the Lower Heavens, which are composed of jasper, belong to the stars. Another tradition depicts the Upper Heavens as the home of the 300 Igigi gods; in the Middle Heavens is the cella of Bel (Marduk); and the Lower Heavens of jasper belong to the stars.[2]

Enuma Elish[3] tells that from half of the body of Tiamat, Bel made the heavens as a roof, and her skin was stretched so her waters would not escape. This suggests that there was a reservoir of water above this “roof,” but the details are not clear. KAR 307:33 says that the Lower Heavens are jasper. They belong to the stars. Bel and the gods drew the lumāsu (“constellations”) on the jasper.[4] A Sumerian text speaks of seven heavens and seven earths.[5]

The term “the firmament of heaven” may be misleading because it implies something that is firm or solid. The expression shupuk shame  is related to the verb shapāku (to pour out; to heap up). The term shupuk shame refers to the foundations of the mountains (shadû), shupuk shame may refer to the sky (the visible heaven) as the foundation of the invisible higher heavens. But lexically speaking, the word shupuk need not refer to something that is firm or solid.[6]

We do not find any mythological description of the heavens in the Bible. The word shamayim (“heaven”) can refer to the atmosphere in which dew and frost form (Genesis 27:28; Job 38:29) and in which the birds fly (Deuteronomy 4:17). The word can also refer to outer space where the sun, the moon, and the stars are (Deuteronomy 4:19). In contrast to the Babylonian view of three heavens and many gods, the Hebrew Scriptures tell that there is one God, and his throne is in the heaven (2 Chronicles 20:6), without further specification.

[1]. For a detailed description, see Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 3–19. 39. Ibid., 9–15.

[2]. Ibid., 9–15.

[3]. Enuma Elish IV:137–140.

[4]. Wayne Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 14, 15, says: “The terminology of KAR 307 33 suggests that the stars and constellations were thought to be etched directly onto the jasper surface of the Lower Heavens. . . . A tradition that the fixed-stars were inscribed onto the surface of the heavens implies that this surface rotated every 24 hours, since inscribed stars could not move independently.”

[5]. Ibid., 208, 209. The Pseudepigraphic Book of 3 Enoch and the Quran (Sura 65:12; 78:12) speak of seven heavens or seven universes.

[6]. Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 240–41.

BABYLONIAN VIEWS OF THE EARTH AND THE UNDERWORLD

The tablet KAR 307:34–38 speaks of three earths. The Upper Earth, which is the surface of the earth, is inhabited by ziqiqu amēlūti. The word ziqiqu can have the meaning “ghosts of the dead”; amēlūti refers to mankind. So, the Upper Earth is inhabited by “embodied spirits of living humans, which means the human family.”[1] The Middle Earth is Apsu (fresh water), and it is the abode of Ea. The Lowest Earth is the Underworld (irkalla), the “land of no return” (ertset la târi). It is inhabited by the deities Nergal and Ereshkigal, by the 600 Annunaki-gods, and by dead humans. It is a dark and gloomy place below the surface of the earth and below the subterranean waters.

There is a road from the earth’s surface to the gate of the Underworld where the river Hubur flows. The dead have to cross the river Hubur, where he or she is greeted by Humuttabal (“take away quickly”). The four-handed boatman with a face like the storm- bird ferries the dead person to the other side of the river. From there, the dead proceed to the great city of the Underworld; seven walls, each one with a gate guarded by a demon, surround the city.

Inside the city is the palace of the queen of the Underworld, Ereshkigal (“Queen of the great earth”) made of lapis lazuli, and the palace of justice, where the Annunaki are. This is really “the land of no return” where the dead have to lead their miserable lives without any hope.[2] Gods, demons, and ghosts can take a road that leads directly from the gates of heaven to the gates of the Underworld.

The Hebrew word sheōl refers to the grave. According to the view of the Hebrew Bible, a human being is a living soul and does not have a spiritual part (soul or spirit) that continues to live when the person dies. Death is the opposite of life, and there was no life in sheōl. Genesis 2:7, NIV, says: “. . . and the man became a living being.” The word “being” is translated from sheōl which literally means “soul.” So, the man did not receive a soul, but he became a soul.

Ecclesiastes 3:19, 20, NIV, says:

Man’s fate is like that of the animal; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.

A man who dies can hope to have a resurrection, but not so the animals. But humans and animals die in exactly the same way, and they both return to the earth. (Genesis 3:19) Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10, NIV, says:

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten. Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

These words show that there is no consciousness in sheōl. This is also shown in Psalm 146:3, 4, NIV:

Do not put your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save. When their spirit departs, they return to the ground; on that very day their plans come to nothing.

 The word “plans” is heshbōn, which comes from the verb hāshab (“to think”), and heshbōn should have been translated “thoughts” rather than “plans.” So, when a man dies, he has no thoughts anymore.[3]

The Hebrew word shamayim (heaven) is dual, but that does not indicate that there are two heavens; this Hebrew word is dual, just as the Hebrew mayim (water) is dual, and mayim does not refer to two kinds of water. So, the Hebrew view was that there was one heaven and one earth, whereas the Babylonian view was mythological: there were three heavens and three earths.

[1]. Ibid., 17.

[2]. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis, 172.

[3]. In some places, a certain imagery is used in connection with sheōl, and the first impression the reader gets is that there is life in sheōl. An analysis of these places shows that they do not contradict the passages quoted above. See Furuli, The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation, 99–104.

THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE EARTH IN BABYLON AND SUMER

The tablet BM 92687 from the middle of the first millennium BCE contains a “map of the world.” On the map, Babylon is in the middle, and the countries Assur and Urartu are mentioned, together with the cities Der, Bit Yakin, and Habban. There is also a mountainous district and a swamp. Around Babylon and the other geographical places is marratu, the ocean. The triangular areas beyond the outer circle of the ocean are called nagû (regions), which possibly are islands.[1]

Above the earth are the heavens, and we find the expressions kippat burūme (the circle of the sky) and kippat samê (the circle of heaven). The word kippatu has the meaning “circle, loop, ring,” and according to Horowitz, the word kippatu does not refer to the heaven as a dome but always to flat, circular objects.[2] Regarding the surface of the earth, we find the terms kippat sharē (“the circle of the winds”),[3] kippat matatē (“the circle of the lands”), and kippat erseti (“the circle of the earth”). When the Babylonians used these expressions, they probably referred to the horizon.

For a person standing on the ground, the horizon could be imagined as being circular. But this was only an imagination that could not be directly seen.[4] The situation would be different for a person who was high up above the earth. The Epic of Etana tells how Etana, king of Kish, ascends to the heaven on the wings of an eagle. If Etana really had been high up above the earth, he could have seen that the earth was circular. At different stages of height Etana describes the earth, but he does not mention any horizon or circle related to the earth, only that the land and the sea looked smaller and smaller.

[1]. Herodotus and Anaximander describe Greek maps where the land is surrounded by okeanos, the great ocean, with the inhabited world in the middle. The center of the Greek maps is Delphi, and the center of the Babylonian map is Babylon. Moreover, the Greek maps do not include land areas beyond the okeanos, as does the Babylonian map. Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 41.

[2]. Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 264

[3]. Ibid., 206.

[4]. Ibid., 330.

THE VIEW OF THE EARTH IN THE BIBLE

In the Bible, there is one description of the earth with the same perspective as that of Etana. Isaiah 40:22 says that God “sits above the circle (hūg) of the earth.” From God’s position, the earth could be seen as circular, just as pictures taken by modern astronauts have shown. The word hūg refers to objects that are circular in a geometrical sense, which also could include spherical objects.

We have no reason to think that Isaiah or his readers believed that the earth was a sphere—the word he used indicated circularity or roundness in some sense that was not specified. However, Job 26:7 has the following description of the earth:

He spreads the north over empty space; he hangs the earth over nothing.

If, from our position on the ground, we look northward and focus our eyes on a point in the heavens north of our position, below this point there is empty space. And the same is true with the earth itself; it does not rest on anything or hang on anything. These descriptions are far from the views of the Babylonians, who, as far as we know, did not have ideas about the earth without foundations.

 But even though the descriptions of the earth in Isaiah and Job did not give the ancient readers a modern view of the earth, the Hebrew descriptions of a circular or spherical earth hanging upon nothing corroborate the modern scientific view of the earth.

MAN AND HIS FUTURE IN MESOPOTMIA AND IN THE BIBLE 

According to the first three chapters of Genesis, humans were created with the prospect of living forever on the earth. Man was created perfect, and death was introduced when the two first humans violated God’s laws and by this rebelled against God’s rule. According to the Babylonian view, man was created from the blood of the wicked god Kingu, and therefore man was evil from the beginning. Siduri, the divine herald, told Gilgamesh:

When the gods created mankind, they allotted death to mankind.[1]

The god of death, Uggae, existed before the creation of mankind,[2] and the dead had to lead a miserable life in the Underworld forever.

The Akkadian word napistu is used in the same way as the Hebrew cognate næpæsh The words refer to a living creature and not to any spiritual part of man. However, contrary to the Hebrew view, the Babylonian view was that man consisted of a body and a spirit. When a person died, there was a separation of body and spirit; the body was buried, and his spirit went to the Underworld. It was important to provide food and drink to the dead person when he was buried, and thereafter regularly.[3]

A failure to provide the dead person with food and drink would cause him to feel hunger, and his spirit would roam about the world and feed on the garbage thrown into the streets. If the dead person were not buried, his spirit would not get admission to and “rest” in the Underworld. In this case, when he was buried but not given the necessary care, his spirit would torment living persons.

In contrast with the Babylonian mythological viewpoints, the Bible says that ruah, the spirit of man, is the impersonal life force, which in a figurative way goes back to God when a person dies. (Ecclesiastes 12:7) The contrast of beliefs is not only that of the condition of the dead: that according to Babylonian thought, they also continued to live in the Underworld, but according to Hebrew thought, they became unconscious and ceased to exist.

 But there is also a great contrast related to the future: the dead in the Babylonian Underworld had to continue to lead their miserable lives forever, without any hope of a change, but in Hebrew thought, the unconscious dead in sheōl were in line for a resurrection or recreation where they would receive their lives back and could live a happy life as humans on the earth forever. The hope of a resurrection is mentioned in Isaiah 26:19; Hosea 13:14, Daniel 12:13; and Job 14:13.

[1]. The Epic of Gilgamesh X, III:3–5 (Old Babylonian version).

[2]. Enuma Elish VI:120.

[3]. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis, 138, 139, 151, 155, 156.

CONCLUSION REGARDING MESOPOTAMIAN AND HEBREW BELIEFS

After having discussed the different views of man, death, and the future of man, Heidel concludes:

These differences set the eschatology of the Mesopotamians and that of the Hebrews as far apart as the east is from the west. It is therefore obvious that the eschatology of the Old Testament did not develop from that of the Babylonians and Assyrians.[1] 

Regarding the creation account, Heidel says:

There are those who seem to be convinced that Gen. 1:1–2:3 shows Babylonian traces, while others appear to be just as convinced that it does not. In my estimation, no incontrovertible evidence can for the present be produced for either side; I believe that the whole question must still be left open. [Heidel’s italics.]

There is a great difference between the Babylonian and Sumerian accounts and the account of Genesis. The Babylonian account is purely mythological and polytheistic: Matter is eternal, and the gods were created by the mingling by salt and sweet water; heaven and earth were made from the split body of the goddess Tiamat, and human beings were made from the blood of the slain wicked god Kingu. Humans were created wicked and mortal, and at death, the spirit of man went to the Underworld where he must live a miserable life forever.

The account of Genesis is monotheistic and sublime: The eternal God, Jehovah, created the heaven and the earth. The earth was made habitable for humans during six periods, and before the sixth period ended, the first man and woman were created. The humans were perfect, and they and their offspring could live forever on the earth. The first humans rebelled against God, and sin and death entered the scene. When humans died, no part of them lived anywhere. God made preparations in order to remove the effects of sin and rebellion so those who are dead can be resurrected and can live forever on the earth. So, the original purpose of God will be fulfilled.

[1]. Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Prallels, 223. Heidel ascertains the great difference between the two systems of belief, even though he erroneously believes that according to the Hebrew thought there was also a difference between body and spirit, and that man’s spirit at death departed to the Underworld. However, even though he believed that this view was similar, he points out the differences that 1) the body and spirit according to Babylonian thought were interdependent and the spirit needed to be fed, but this was not the case according the Hebrew thought, and 2) the departed spirits according to Babylonian thought could harm the living, but that was not possible according to Hebrew thought.

ADDENDUM

I started this study with a reference to the New Catholic Bible, which ascribes a mythologic view to the ancient Hebrews. According to this Bible, the view was that there was a massive vault above the earth where the stars were fastened, and above this vault, there were waters that fell down to the earth as rain and show through holes in the vault. Two Hebrew words are used to support this viewpoint, namely, rāqī’a (“expanse”) and tehōm (“a large body of water”). I will now discuss these two words.

        RĀQĪ‘A

The Latin Vulgate translated the word with firmamentum, which refers to something that is supporting. The RSV uses the English word firmament, which also suggests that God made a solid vault above the earth. The NIV and many other modern translations use the word expanse, which we do not associate with a solid vault.

The basic meaning of the verb rāq‘ā  is “to hammer; stamp; spread.” In Exodus 39:3, the verb is used with the meaning “hammer out” (sheets of gold). This side of the semantic range of rāq‘ā is the basis for the translation of rāqī’a as “firmament,” which implies a solid dome or vault above the earth.

However, the sense “spread” is also a part of the semantic range of the verb, and what is spread need not be solid. In Isaiah 42:5 and 44:24, the verb rāq‘ā  is parallel to the verb nāt‘ā  (to stretch out)—the heavens are stretched out and the earth is spread out. The vastness of both the heavens and the earth are stressed, but hardly that the earth and the stars are solid. The words of Job 37:18 show tha rāq‘ā  need not have a solid object, because the object is shāhaq (clouds, fine dust).

That rāqī’a is not a solid vault but refers to the atmosphere is also suggested by the flying of the birds and the position of the two luminaries, the sun and the moon. In Genesis 1:15, 16, the luminaries are said to be “in” (be) the rāqī’a, not “on” the rāqī’a or fastened to the rāqī’a. The birds fly ‘al-penē rāqī’a (1:20). What does ‘al-penē mean? In Genesis 1:2 and 6:1, ‘al-penē evidently has the meaning “upon”; in 1:29 we find the meaning “upon” or “on the face of.” So where did the birds fly? Below a solid firmament? No, the preposition tahat (below) is not used here, as it is in Ezekiel 1:23, where the wings of the cherubs are stretched out “under the expanse” (tahat hā rāqī’a). The NIV and JPS render the expression in Genesis 1:20 as “across the expanse,” and this is a good choice. The natural conclusion is simply that rāqī’a is the atmosphere; the luminaries are viewed as lights “in” the atmosphere, and the birds fly “across” the atmosphere.

TEHŌM

The word refers to a large body of water, such as the Red Sea (Isaiah 51:10; 63:13). In Akkadian, the word tâmtu refers to the sea or a large body of water, and (the goddess) tiāmat is related to this word. There is no reason to say that the Hebrew tehōm is borrowed from the Akkadian tiāmat.

The middle radical of the Hebrew word is the laryngeal he, and this laryngeal is not found in tiāmat. This is a rather big difference and indicates that tehōm is not taken from tiāmat.[1] Moreover, the word tiāmat is feminine while tehōm is masculine. If borrowed from Akkadian, we would have expected a feminine ending in tehōm. The Hebrew tehōm is a cognate of the normal Akkadian word for sea, tâmtu, and it does not derive from the mythological word tehōm.[2] So, the conclusion is that tehōm can refer to any large body of water.

[1]. Koehler and Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, and Harris, Archer Jr., and Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, both say that tehōm is not borrowed from tiāmat. Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis: The Story of Creation, 99, says: “Ti’âmat, as we have observed, is a mythical personality. Such significance the Old Testament tehom never has.” The complete lack of mythological association appears with unmistakable clarity from Gen. 1:2: “And darkness was upon the face of tehōm,” that is, on the surface of the deep. If tehōm were here treated as a mythological entity, the expression “face” would have to be taken literally; but this would obviously lead to absurdity, for why should there be darkness only on the face of tehōm and not over the entire body? “On the face of the deep” is here used interchangeably with “on the face of the waters,” which we meet at the end of the same verse.

[2].  Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, 302–303, says: “The most common Akkadian name for the sea is tâmtu, a word that also occurs in the uncontracted form ti’amat/ti’amtu, and as tâmatu/tâwatu. The word derives from the root thm and is a cognate of Hebrew tehom.”

OVERSKRIFT 3

CONCLUSION