Genesis 1 And Egyptian Creation Myths Summary

George Lachow
Professor Alex Stewart
MMW 121
14 July 2015
CRA Assignment
In the article “Genesis 1 and Ancient Egyptian Creation Myths,” researcher Gordon H. Johnston reiterates the conclusions that A. H. Sayce, A. S. Yahuda have reached about the comparisons of Genesis 1 and Egyptian creation myths (Johnston, 180). Johnston postulates that there are undoubtedly strong similarities and connections between Genesis 1 and Egyptian creation myths (Johnston, 180). Johnston noted that these earlier analyses were overlooked and not accepted due to various reasons; easily accessible Mesopotamian materials, the assumption that Genesis 1 should be classified as a Priest source, ignorance of the Hebrew bibles’ Egyptian origins, and misunderstanding of the Egyptians terminology when analyzing creation ideas (Johnston, 179).

Most scholars claimed similarities between Genesis 1 to Enuma Elish, a Babylonian creation myth, solely because they were thought to share references of divine conflict with the waters of chaos, yet Johnston insists there are two problems with claiming that these writings share significant resemblances (Johnston, 178).

First, both begin with referencing the Primordial Waters, but researchers have failed to establish a conclusion about terminology (Johnston, 179). Secondly, Genesis 1 lacks a divine conflict between God and the Primordial waters, which is very prominent in the Enuma Elish (Johnston, 179).
Johnston summarizes A. H. Sayce and A. S. Yahuda’s work into three distinct claims. Johnston’s initial claim was that trained Egyptologists identified equivalent meanings between Genesis 1 and Egyptian creation myths reference to the beginning (Johnston, 183). He concluded that both writings refer to this reference as the absolute beginning of any activity in the entire cosmos (Johnston,

183).
Johnston claims structural similarities by expanding and setting the Genesis 1 and three Egyptian creation myths side by side for the reader to see the similarities. He clearly demonstrates that the structure and sequence of events in Genesis 1 is not only identical to the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts of the Old Kingdom, but also represents the structure and order of Memphite Theology in the New Kingdom (Johnston, 183-184). He does make notice of small differences with the order of events in Genesis 1, but believed it is due to a Hebrew alteration (Johnston, 185).
Lastly, Johnston claims that Hebrews and Egyptians shared a very similar view about the state of the cosmos before any creation. Johnston sectioned this claim into four specific elements, which together, make up the complete idea of the cosmos initial state. In the article, the author notes that Genesis 1:2 identifies four pre-creational elements (Johnston 185-186). Similarly, there were four pairs of Egyptian Gods that represent the cosmic forces. He equates Genesis 1 ideas of empty formlessness, darkness, watery deep, and the divine spirit/wind of God respectively to the Egyptian boundless in differentiation, infinite obscurity, primordial water, and the divine wind/soul (Johnston, 186).
Clearly Genesis 1 and Egyptian creation myths shared many similarities in the fundamental structure and meanings, but discrepancies weren’t neglected. Johnston used not only what was found, but also what wasn’t found to construct a very apparent and concise conclusion that establishes the idea that Genesis 1 was created to rebut the ideas of Egyptian creation mythology because it competed for the Israelites allegiance (Johnston 194).