>>841927
Here's another thing on that note: Just the fact of how convoluted the Akkadian and Sumerian stories are compared to the more direct and simple biblical ones are should be enough to make one doubt if it's truly older.
It usually doesn't work like that, where the complex and elaborate product is the original. Be it with the evolution of stories, weapons, clothing, food recipes, etc.. It's true that the writings are older, but not necessarily the retention of that particular version. There are oral traditions that predate all of it.
And when I say convoluted, I don't just mean the plot points or the clever nature of Enki, but also just how things are phrased. There are more poetic flourishes and such. The bible is more direct and rarely examines psychology or the context of people's mood, while the other Epics have phrases like "The Flood roared like a bull. Like a wild ass screaming, the winds howled."
Genesis simply doesn't speak like that. It's stark prose. You'd have to into the much later Prophets or Psalms to get language like this. Even with the beauty of the KJV, it still doesn't attempt to embellish the story too much:
"And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.
And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters."
These are simple verbs and direct depictions and not metaphorical crap like "The Flood roared like a bull". Those are words of a court poet or priest, who's just ruining an older story. And the fact that they keep pushing Enki as a hero tells me it was written by a priest of Enki.