and the Flying Serpent and Leviathan
were. Now investigation has shown that we have, in these references to
the deeds of Yahweh, fragments of the Babylonian myth of creation.
These creatures are monsters whom Yahweh makes captive before he orders
the original chaos into a cosmos. In doing this, he is a counterpart
of Marduk, the Babylonian creator. These monsters, like the gods who
conquer them, are only personified forms of phenomena in the heavens
above and the earth beneath. Let us now consider the stories of
creation given in Genesis. It is not widely enough known that there
are two distinct accounts which, although they are externally combined,
can easily be separated even in the English translation. The oldest
version begins with chapter two, verse five. This version is called
the prophetic account. It assumes that the world already exists and
concerns itself only with man's appearance, the institution of
marriage, and the general features of man's life. God forms man out of
the dust of the ground, as a potter molds his clay, and breathes into
him the breath of life. He places him in a garden to dress and keep
it. But the incidents which follow are so familiar to every one that
there is no need to repeat them. Scholars have pointed out that this
account is very similar to that current in Babylonia. The motives are
like those found in the Gilgamish and Adapa {39} myths. The
differences in general tone and in geographical details can readily be
explained by the later date--about the eighth century--and the
character of the Palestinian landscape. Those who read Hebrew will
note the difference in vocabulary between the second chapter in Genesis
and the first, while those who are confined to the English translation
should especially note that the two words, Lord and God, are combined
in the prophetic account. There are many naive, and obviously
primitive, touches in this creation story which give it a quaint charm.
Only those, however, who are themselves naive in their outlook upon the
world can dream of taking it as other than folk-lore. I must confess
that it is a mystery to me that so many fairly educated men can take it
as anything but what it so obviously is, a creation myth.

The creation story, told in the first chapter, is called by scholars
the priestly account. It is post-exilic and, so, relatively late. The
foundation consists of mythical ideas which go back to the mists of
antiquity. Fro