The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1894-04-18
NOAH'S DELUGE.
The Flood a. Described in the Cansiforn
Inscriptions of Assyria-

Inscriptions of Assyria-
Prof. Jastrow, of the university Of
Pennsylvania, in'writing of THE Bible
and the Assyrian Monuments" says
this about the practical identity Of
the biblical story of the deluge with
that found in the cuneiform in scrip
lures:
The,variations are very slight, and
affect only such minor points as the
measurements of the ark, the cont inu-
ance of the food, the kind of birds
sent ont. and the order of their send
ing. Besides this the biblical nara
tive is somewhat more elaborate, and
gives details concerning the animals
that entered the ark. and other mat
tiers which the cuneiform record omits.
1t is also to be noted that
there is no mention in the
latter of the olive branch
which in the Bible tn, dove brings to
Noah. Nor is there any distinction in
the Babylonian version between clean
and unclean animals; but this omission
is satisfactorily accounted for on the
theory, now almost universally accept
ed by scholars. that the biblical mar
rative of the deluge in its present
shape is itself the result of combina-
ton of two slightly different versions
which have been dove-tailed into each
other. In the version. the older of the
two-which assumed q definite shape
ut a period when the sanitary regula-
tions as embodied in the Book Of
Leviticus regarding clean and unclean
animals were not yet inforced-Noah
is told to bring every living thing.
two of every kind, male and female"
into the ark. without distinction of
clean and unclean. In the second YER
sion, which furnishes us in this way
with a good example on the manner
In which old traditions were trans
formed to meet changed conditions,
we read "of every clean beast thou
shalt take seven pair. male and female,
but of the unclean two pair" Leaving
this aside. the general course and Sc
quence of events are precisely the same
in both, and there is scarcely any room
for doubt that they must have sprung
from a common source.
Here again. as in the story of the
creation, the superiority of the Biblical
version over its Babylonian companion
is due purely and solely to the ad-
vanced religious and ethical spirit per-
vading it. In the cuneiform record the
dire decree is simply within of the
gods; in the Bible the deluge is sent as
q punishment for wrong-doing. Noah
Is singled out because he was lust and
upright" but we are not told for what
virtues Sit-napishti finds grace in the
eyes of Ea. The varying conclu-
sions of tho two accounts are
less characteristic. Ea's appeal to
Bel has certainly beauties, and
the blessing bestowed on Sit-napisnti
and his wife forms finale Of true
dramatic power; but how infinitely
grander is the establishment of the
everlasting covenant between God
and Noah with which the eighth chap
ter in Genesis closes.
There is indeed . curious trace Of an
old heathenish notion in the words:
And God smelled the sweet SAVIOR" of
the sacrifice. just as in the cuneiform
document 1.-The gods inhale the per-
fume," but at once in the following
words there is leap to the highest
plane of religious thought. God says
that He will never again destroy the
universe on account of men. $50 long !
as the earth continues, seed-time and |
cold and heat, summer
and winter, day and night, shall not
suffer interruption" The cuneiform |
story ends as it began-with caprice;
the reconciliation of Bel is as capri !
cious as his anger. The Bible begins |
with the PRONUNCIATION ef righteous
ness, and closes with the con affirmation /
Of law.