Rabbit Trail— The Epic of Gilgamesh

While researching for another class, I stumbled upon a little article claiming that Gilgamesh and Enkidu have a homosexual relationship in The Epic of Gilgamesh.  I would think that what Ninsun says to Gilgamesh about Enkidu “you will love him as a woman and he will never forsake you” is probably their best evidence.  

However, I would argue that this claim is quite a bit of a stretch.  There are many stories of strong and passionate brotherly love in other ancient texts as well (a lot in the Bible). I do not think Eros (passionate love/intimate love) has to be sexual in nature.  Can’t brotherly (sisterly) love be powerful?

 Now, we might call this type of relationship a “bromance”.  Just in case you don’t know what a “bromance” is I have added a video that explains. 

(\__/)

(='.'=) – “Can you feel my heart beat?”

 (")_(")

                  

                          (The bunny is making an only slightly obscure Korean pop music reference) 

Cain and Abel--- Rabbit Trail

Rabbit Trail---

There is a Korean Drama (television show) called “Cain and Abel” based on the story of Cain and Abel from Geneses.  I have never seen the show (even though I watch a lot of Korean Dramas) but It got high ratings when it came out.  The themes in Cain and Abel are as relevant and relatable now as they were in Ancient times.  You can watch “Cain and Abel" on http://www.dramafever.com along with a whole lot of other amazing shows.

(\__/)
(='.'=)– “소지섭오빠!"
(")_(")

Dial “M” for murder— ext. 408 if you plan to kill your brother

Cain and Abel

I am going to talk about a few elements of the story of Cain and Abel.  When reading Geneses 4 there are many things we just assume that are not in the text. Centuries of cultural interpretations, mutilations of the text in children’s stories, wonky church doctrines, movies, you name it, have impacted our understanding of this story.

So I am going to list somethings that we tend to assume but that are not actually in the text. And then show that they are either disproved by the text or not elaborated upon enough to assume one way or the other.

• Cain did not care as much about presenting a good offering to the Lord (he just gave him whatever).

Says who? The Bible doesnt speak clearly on this point, it simply states that Cain gave the “Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground” (Gen 4:3). It doesn’t say why God found favor in Abel’s offering just that he did.

• Abel was perfect

Was he? The Bible goes into very little detail about Abel, the only things we know about him are that he was a “keeper of sheep”, his offering was pleasing, and he talked to and was killed by Cain. For all we know Abel provoked Cain.
• God hated Cain
I do not see in evidence of God hating Cain. In fact God warns Cain in verse 7 stating that sin was "crouching" at his door and he must overcome it. God’s punishment could also be seen as merciful; he prevented Cain from being killed at the hands of men. Nothing is written stating that God hated Cain even though at other times it is written that God hates someone. It says Malachi 1: 2-3 that God loved Jacob but hated Esau. (These twin brothers are discussed in Geneses starting in chapter 25) However, nothing like this is stated about Cain.

• God was asking Cain a question because he did not know the answer
I don’t see why asking a question and not knowing the answer are mutually exclusive, like I said in class I ask questions of my children all the time that I know the answer to. “Did you hit your brother?” instead of “I saw you hit your brother”.

It is a judicial process (a really merciful one at that). God is giving Cain the opportunity to fess up without any prying.

But if he is omniscient wouldn’t he know Cain wasn’t going to fess up?

So What? One of the most annoying things is when someone tells you “I’m not even going to ask you this question because I already know you are going to lie to me.” Parents often use that line and boy is it frustrating, makes one want yell “So what, just let me speak for myself!!!”

God gives Cain the ability to speak for himself by asking this question, the fact that God knew he wasn’t going to fess up wouldn’t change the purpose of actually asking the question. Like I said it is a judicial process.

• Cain’s Anger was his undoing

Cain is never punished for his anger; instead he is given a warning not to sin. Anger in itself is not considered a sin in the Bible. There are many times when God is Angry and “Be angry and do not sin” is repeated twice in the Bible (Psalms 4:4 & Ephesians 4:26).

*One last thought*
Does anyone else find what God says to Cain filled with love?
A clear warning, then “What have you done?” instead of “You killed your brother!” I don’t think Cain is the massive villain he is painted to be, but instead a man who sins and finds his “guilt (punishment)* to great to bear”(Gen 4:3)
 *“punishment” and “guilt” are both given as possible words for the text.

The Flood Story

Flood Story Cliff Notes Style

Mankind is being evil. . . Noah Finds favor in Gods eyes . . . God tells Noah to build ark. . . . Therefore saving Noah, his family and a lot of animals . . . there is a big flood . . . everyone or thing (not including ocean creatures) not on the ark is wiped from the earth . . . Flood subsides . . . Noah and everyone/thing else get off the ark . . . God promises never again in the form of a rainbow.

Attributes of Yahweh

Yahweh (the God of the Flood story) is complex to say the least. I’ll put it this way, God is not a static character in Genesis (or the rest of the Bible for that matter). I actually had a pretty difficult time pulling out “descriptions of the type of god Yahweh is” from the text alone.

Yahwah grieves

“And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth and it grieved him to his heart” Geneses 6:6 ESV

First, though I really like my translation of the Bible, I find “וַיִּנָּ֣חֶם” which in the ESV is translated as “was sorry” is better translated as “And it repented the”. But regardless this verse shows that Yahwah was upset and not just regretted creating man but “grieved” over the fact that he created man.

I would also like to point out that regretting something does not guaranty you did not know it would happen. I knew I would regret taking a nap today, did it anyways and currently regret it. But the situation in the Bible is bigger than napping. Perhaps Yahwah creates mankind (knowing that he would regret it) to teach future man a lesson.

Yahwah is Just

“But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord” Geneses 6:8 ESV

Yahwah could have easily destroyed all mankind but he did not do this. Instead he spared the ones who were “righteous”, Noah and his Family.

Yahweh Blesses

“And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” Geneses 9:1 ESV

The first thing Yahweh says to Noah after the flood is to bless mankind. And I might add, allows them to eat meat! “Every moving thing shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.” Genesis 9:3 ESV

Rabbit Trail—

I was going to put a picture of Noah here, but I could only find white Noahs. Since that is not even genetically logical, I will refrain from posting a picture of Noah.

(\__/)

                                             (='.'=) –“Thanks centuries of racism!”

(")_(")

                                                      (The bunny is sarcastic)

The Flood Story -- Rabbit Trail

Rabbit Trail –
In the Pima (Akimel O’odham) creation story the Juhwert-a-Mah-kai (Doctor of the Earth), created humanity and destroyed it a good three times before creating modern man (Belasco, Johnson pg 45-46). The one time by flood in Genesis doesn’t seem so dramatic in comparison.

(\__/)

                                                  (='.'=) –“fourth time’s the charm, eh?”
(")_(")

Works Cited

Belasco, Susan and Johnson Linck. The Bedford Anthology of American Literature. New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008. Print.

The Bible as Literature

Side note / a little background info / a rabbit trail-

Around 1450 Gutenberg invented movable type. (Belasco, Johnson pg.3)

Though, in reality movable type had been around for hundreds and hundreds of years in Asia. Woodblock printing and ceramic printing had been around a long, long time.

The first metal movable type was invented in Korea during the Goryeo Dynasty in 1234 and was credited to 최윤의(Choe Yun-ui). (Chon)(Sohn) (I think he was given the credit because he was higher up on the food chain – if you know what I mean.) Some say another movable type strikingly similar to Gutenberg was invented in Korea in the early 1400’s and could have inspired Gutenberg. (Christensen)

But before I start calling Gutenberg a copy cat (pun totally intended!) and bashing American children’s “World history” textbooks for not disclosing the whole truth to our children, I will end this rabbit trail. (I found the bunny anyways).      

                                     (\__/)      

                                                  (='.'=) -  "아이고!"

                                               (")_(")               

                                                             (the bunny speaks Korean)

So back to my main point. . .

Gutenberg invented the first European movable type around 1450 and a revolution occurred. Soon after this invention the Bible was widely available in the vernacular (I will skip a description of the Protestant reformation--- you’re welcome).

                                                        

Anyways, since then billions of Bibles have been printed in hundreds of different languages and thousands of different forms. To say that the Bible is not an influential piece of literature would just be illogical.



I don’t know anything about the production and distribution of the Torah (Hebrew Bible Scroll).

The Bible has not only effected history (e.i. Expansion to the Colonies, protestant revolution, Catholicism- though most the public did not have the Bible and it was in Latin- and so on) but it has also massively effected literature. It is impossible to understand much of literature without at least understanding the Bible at least at a basic level. This is why we need to study the Bible and other influential works (Greek mythology and so on).

Another Reason

We should also study the Bible because it is a beautiful and complex piece of literature, even without all the cultural and societal implications. In class the economy of language in the Bible was discussed. The Psalms is a large collection of poetry (one could claim the whole Bible is poetic).

It has a interesting plot, a lot of dynamic action, you can read small parts as short stories, there are heroes and villains. Life, death, love and loss --- it is all there.

Oh and read the Song of Solomon. Some say it is about the sexual relationship intended between a husband and wife, some say it is about the love between Christ and the church. Either way (or both ways) it is quite poetically sexual.

Works Cited - though not a very good one  

Belasco, Susan and Johnson Linck. The Bedford Anthology of American Literature. New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008. Print.

Chon Hye-bong. “Typography in Korea: Birthplace of Moveable Metal Type.” Korea Journal 3:7 (July 1963): 10–19.

Christensen, Thomas. "Did East Asian Printing Traditions Influence the European Renaissance?" Arts of Asia Magazine. 2007. online. http://www.rightreading.com/printing/gutenberg.asia/gutenberg-asia-1-introduction.htm

Sohn, Pow-Key (summer 1993). "Printing Since the 8th Century in Korea". Koreana 7 (2): 4–9.

Metamorphoses & Enuma Elish (The Epic of Creation)

Finding similarities in two pieces of ancient literature could be akin to comparing apples and oranges.  Metamorphoses and Enuma Elish are more like a Fuji apple and a granny smith. One is a little tarter and both need to be chopped up before I can consume them happily. (One of my professors recently told me never to use clichés. Notice my blatant disregard for authority!)

There are many similarities between these two creation stories.

Structure

Both Metamorphoses and Enuma Elish originated from cultures with a heavy oral tradition. Enuma Elish would have been recited as part of a large ceremony and Ovid would have recited Metamorphose not simple wrote it down. The fact that these pieces needed to be memorized dramatically affected their structure. This also meant they were created / evolved with a similar structure.

And I do not just mean that they both have short lines (though they do). I am mostly taking about the repetition of words and names. I would think they both had a rhythmic feel as well— the loss of which is the most depressing aspect of reading a translated text.

Enuma Elish -- copy of tablet 1 -- I can just sence the rythmic pattern! Can't you? 

Chaos to Order 

Metamorphoses and Enuma Elish are both Creation myths. In keeping with most creation myths they move from chaos to order.

In Ovid’s Metamorphoses creation starts with the universe in chaos. There is no earth, no shape or form. It is “Chaos, so-called, all rude and lumpy matter” (Ovid, 168).

Enuma Elish demonstrates a completely different type of chaos: the chaos of namelessness. The first two lines “When the skies above were not yet named— Nor earth below pronounced name” (The Epic of Creation 147).

Violence

Once everything starts to get more organized (things get named, gods are born/made/ whatever) both Metamorphoses and Enuma Elish delve into violence. After all what was says "creation myth" better than everyone (men and gods) diving into an incestuous murderous rage?