Creation and Chaos in the Primeval Era and the Eschaton: A Religio-Historical Study of Genesis 1 and Revelation 12

by Hermann Gunkel

Foreword by Peter MachinistHermann Gunkel's groundbreaking Schöpfung und Chaos, originally published in German in 1895, is here translated in its entirety into English for the first time. Even though available only in German, this work by Gunkel has had a profound influence on modern biblical scholarship.Discovering a number of parallels between the biblical creation accounts and a Babylonian creation account, the Enuma Elish, Gunkel argues that ancient Babylonian traditions shaped the Hebrew people's perceptions both of God's creative activity at the beginning of time and of God's re-creative activity at the end of time.Including illuminating introductory pieces by eminent scholar Peter Machinist and by translator K. William Whitney, Gunkel's Creation and Chaos will appeal to serious students and scholars in the area of biblical studies.

Genres: Religion

484 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 15, 2006

About the author

German Old Testament scholar, founded form criticism. He also became a leading representative of the history of religions school. His major works cover Genesis and the Psalms, and his major interests centered on the oral tradition behind written sources and in folklore.

Reviews

[Alan Fuller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gunkel views the many similarities between Babylonian myth and Genesis. The Babylonian "chaos myth" was well known to Judaism. Ancient astral religion is seen as the probable origin of the myths (Jer 10:2). Then the Genesis account is compared to the symbolism of Revelation. The last things are like the first things. The comparison shows that the ancient narrative is the original inspiration behind Revelation, mainly chapter 12. Daniel shares this same inspiration.

Gunkel criticizes interpretation based on contemporaneous history, which is still popular today. Caution should be exercised when literature that is based on OT prophecies is interpreted as contemporaneous history. Such historical exegesis neglects the ideas in the literature. Despite this Gunkel supports historical interpretation, even though he is critical of it.

[Eric Yap · Rating 3 out of 5]

Herman Gunkel's magisterial Schöpfung Und Chaos, translated into English. Gunkel is known as the father of form criticism, the study of higher criticism that aims to decipher oral tradition sources, which liberal-critical scholars maintain that the Scriptures are dependent upon. Specifically in this work, Gunkel develops what is later famously known as the "chaoskampf" motif, and theorizes that it arose from Babylonian creation myth, the slaying of Tiamat by Marduk and the creation of the world as a result of this celestial conflict. Essentially, Gunkel, building on the source criticism and religionsgeschichtliche (history of religion) studies of Wellhausen and others, positing a late dating of the Scriptures and Judaism, maintains that the Babylonian creation epic entered into Israel's cultural milieu and zeitgeist in the exilic eras via oral tradition and therefore exerted an undergirding influence on Judaism and the creation narratives in Genesis. And then, not satisfied with the OT, Gunkel further argues that the same oral tradition later influenced once again later/2nd Temple Judaism in the early Christian period, therefore traces of it can be found in Revelation 12 and its related passages. Therefore, both creation and eschaton in the Scripture owe themselves to Babylonian myth.

Being a relatively dated work, archaeological data and exegetical works after Gunkel have disproven much of source and form criticism (if not higher criticism entirely). One example is that there are even older sources found in western Mesopotamia (where Egypt and Israel are situated) than in eastern Mesopotamia (where Assyria-Babylon is situated), uncovered by archaeologists. Therefore the cultic influence (if any) is likely the reverse of what Gunkel initially posited. There is also the question of the possibility of identifying oral traditions from the Scriptures themselves, at the same time any kind of argument for source criticism has still failed to produce any manuscripts or archaeological data as evidence. Aside from it being a fascinating ANE (ancient near east) study on the Babylonian creation myth, it is hard to find any of Gunkel's exegetical work beneficial, as he often caricatures the texts by asking questions that are not answerable or the focal point of the texts just to further his argument. That said, there are important ANE data, especially Babylonian sources, that may be helpful in understanding the contextual and cultic background of OT studies.

[Parker · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was more interesting than it was useful. No doubt, I'm indebted to Gunkel for setting off the academic study of chaoskampf,with which I'm obsessed. Still, I'm struck by the weakness of the argumentation in so many parts of this book. Many of his arguments, say, for the existence of disparate sources lying behind a given text (be it Genesis 1 or Revelation 12) amount to little more than this: Gunkel struggles to make all the various pieces of the passage fit together in his own mind, so he assumes the text is actually a hodge-podge. It couldn't possibly be that he was missing something -- the text itself is the problem!

The first half of the book, which deals with the Old Testament texts (esp. Gen 1), is far more useful than the second half. But even this is outdated, and superior work has been done since its publication (esp. by John Day). The fact that the Ras Shamra texts had not been discovered yet meant, frankly, that Gunkel could not even know that he had no idea what he was talking about.

The second half of the book was like watching man pinning pictures up on his wall and connecting them with red thread. It was a disorganized mess full of far-fetched assertions. Hardly worth the time it takes to read.

Gunkel's prose (as it's translated by Whitney), was actually quite enjoyable to read. Unlike so much academic literature today, the style has character, energy, and humor. I hope academia will let go of its obsession with blandness return to this!