The oldest copies of scripture that we have (Ketef Hinnom scrolls) date back to the 6th century CE. The oldest fragments of Gilgamesh that we have discovered date back to the 22nd century CE. Likewise, the story of Atrahasis (which as pointed out by Pryke, is likely the inspiration for Gilgamesh's flood narrative) dates back to the 18th century CE. Just based on the archaeological perspective and timeline, it would make a lot more sense that the story of the flood was passed down from Mesopotamian religion to Canaanite religion. I am not quite sure how it is outdated, tired, or a conspiracy theory to make this observation. In Pryke's paper she makes sure to note that we should not jump to conclusion about one text precipitating the other but still says that there is evidence that the Epic of Gilgamesh influenced stories in the Old Testament.
As pertains to Genesis having the most complete story of the flood, Atrahasis and Genesis are both fleshed out and provide detailed descriptions of the floods.
As pertains to the tower of Bable:
Perhaps it is less that every ancient culture has a flood narrative due to them all coming from a story from one book, but rather because all of these cultures settled in fertile deltas and areas that were prone to disastrous flooding. As to the design of the ship being the system that most ships used later, what are common ships? The ark was built with wood so it could not be a similar design to modern oil tankers. Was the design similar to Spanish galleons? Greek Triremes? One of Cheng Ho's ships? What common ship design are you referring to? Our hydrologic, geologic, ecologic, and archaeologic understanding of history does not point to any global flood that wiped out all living things except for the ones on the ark. Also, how would a wooden ark be able to fit two of every living thing at the time? Did Noah travel to every continent to pick up every species?
Pryke is trying to understand literary history through the lens of an unbiased historian and writer without looking at it with religious bias. In this case all signs point to the older copy of one story being the inspiration for the later one.
The oldest copies of scripture that we have (Ketef Hinnom scrolls) date back to the 6th century CE. The oldest fragments of Gilgamesh that we have discovered date back to the 22nd century CE. Likewise, the story of Atrahasis (which as pointed out by Pryke, is likely the inspiration for Gilgamesh's flood narrative) dates back to the 18th century CE. Just based on the archaeological perspective and timeline, it would make a lot more sense that the story of the flood was passed down from Mesopotamian religion to Canaanite religion. I am not quite sure how it is outdated, tired, or a conspiracy theory to make this observation. In Pryke's paper she makes sure to note that we should not jump to conclusion about one text precipitating the other but still says that there is evidence that the Epic of Gilgamesh influenced stories in the Old Testament.
As pertains to Genesis having the most complete story of the flood, Atrahasis and Genesis are both fleshed out and provide detailed descriptions of the floods.
As pertains to the tower of Bable:
Perhaps it is less that every ancient culture has a flood narrative due to them all coming from a story from one book, but rather because all of these cultures settled in fertile deltas and areas that were prone to disastrous flooding. As to the design of the ship being the system that most ships used later, what are common ships? The ark was built with wood so it could not be a similar design to modern oil tankers. Was the design similar to Spanish galleons? Greek Triremes? One of Cheng Ho's ships? What common ship design are you referring to? Our hydrologic, geologic, ecologic, and archaeologic understanding of history does not point to any global flood that wiped out all living things except for the ones on the ark. Also, how would a wooden ark be able to fit two of every living thing at the time? Did Noah travel to every continent to pick up every species?
Pryke is trying to understand literary history through the lens of an unbiased historian and writer without looking at it with religious bias. In this case all signs point to the older copy of one story being the inspiration for the later one.