C. John Collins, «Noah, Deucalion, and the New Testament», Vol. 93 (2012) 403-426
Jewish authors in the second Temple period, as well as early Christian authors after the New Testament, made apologetically-motivated connections between the biblical story of Noah and Gentile stories of the flood, including Greek stories involving deucalion — most notably Plato’s version. Analysis of the New Testament letters attributed to Peter indicates that these also allude to the Gentile flood stories, likely in order to enhance their readers’ sense of the reality of the biblical events.
05_Biblica_1_H_Collins_Layout 1 05/11/12 12:19 Pagina 415
415
NOAH, DEUCALION, AND THE NEW TESTAMENT
ilarly Tobit 4,12 simply mentions Noah among other patriarchal
figures; and 4 Maccabees 15,31 mentions the ark ( ), stress-
ing its function as an image of endurance. Since connecting the bib-
lical flood with any other account is not the goal of these passages,
they add nothing to the present study.
There is evidence that Jews living in Asia Minor brought about
an interaction between the biblical flood story and native flood tra-
ditions. This is already visible in the way that Sibylline Oracles,
Book 1, had Noah land in Phrygia. Paul Trebilco has presented ev-
idence that favors the conclusion that there were several traditions
of a great flood in Phrygia; these traditions did not depend on the
biblical tale. Nevertheless, coins from the city of Apamea Kibotos
in Phrygia, minted in the late second century C.E. and depicting a
scene of Noah and his ark, indicate “that the Jewish community did
not create the local legend but rather reinterpreted it and that its
version was accepted by the city†26.
But Trebilco finds further evidence of this Jewish community
bringing the biblical story of a great flood into interaction with the
local traditions, namely the Sibylline Oracles, Books 1-2; as men-
tioned above, Sib. Or. 1:262 has Noah’s ark landing in Phrygia. Tre-
bilco goes on to argue 27,
The use of Hesiod [in the Sibylline Oracles], and indeed of the Si-
bylline form itself, emphasises the common ground between Jew
and Gentile in the author’s context, which as we have seen is pro-
bably Apamea. (…) It seems likely that the Sibyl was aiming
his/her work at the city, at those who knew only the local flood
story. (…) The use of the Sibylline form and the incorporation of
Hesiod were designed to increase the attractiveness of the book for
Gentile readers and thus to further this apologetic aim.
In general, then, Second Temple Jewish authors with an apolo-
getic stance in relation to the Graeco-Roman world do not outright
reject the Gentile flood stories, but instead draw parallels with
them. They do so to provide further reason for believing the his-
P.R. TREBILCO, Jewish Communities in Asia Minor (SNTSMS; Cam-
26
bridge 1991) 85-103; quotation from 94. HILHORST, “The Noah Storyâ€, 63-
65, declares Trebilco’s case “a strong oneâ€.
TREBILCO, Jewish Communities in Asia Minor, 96, 97, 98.
27