The Gilgamesh Epic is claimed by some to be the oldest known written document.
The confusion about which came first, the Gilgamesh Epic or the Bible, centers on which dating method you use and your worldview. The Egyptian chronology is littered with problems as to accuracy.
If you've studied the history, rather than simply read about it, you already know that Ptolomy II commissioned a priest named Manetho to compile a history of Egypt. You should know that Manatho's chronology is known to be inaccurate. Moses has finally been found in the 12th Dynasty, for example, rather than the 18th where they were looking, and knew the Bible to be in error before. Because Manetho’s history contradicts actual Egyptian records from the time of the pharaohs, historians should not consider Manetho’s history authoritative.
Perhaps the proto-Hebrew texts dating back to the 11th century BC? That and other evidence suggest the Bible was written as events were happening since the Davidic period... Those same texts explicitly refer to the Books of Moses pushing the books of Moses back to 1450 BC.
Parallel historical accounts are found in more than 500 civilizations around the world, many with no clear connection. Independent from the Bible, Noah's grandson Kush is specifically named as a post flood king in the Sumerian Kings list.
Then you have non-textual physical lines of evidence indicating a global event about the time (based on genealogies) that are consistent with the flood or the likely aftermath.
While a study of the Sumerian list is a fascinating journey in discovering the way Sumerians looked upon their ancestry and how their numeric and commercial systems worked, the quality of the biblical text is distinctly superior in both completeness, information, and spiritual and moral quality. The biblical text does not reflect a borrowing from an inferior text. If anything, the very mention of this kings list that matches so closely to the biblical account is a confirmation of biblical authenticity.
The Near Middle Eastern Flood epics have three main versions: the Sumerian Epic of Ziusudra, the Akkadian Atrahasis Epic, and the Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. The Gilgamesh Epic is the most complete with 12 tablets decipherable and the eleventh tablet with the most complete flood account of the three versions. These flood epics reveal many internal inconsistencies, which rule them out from being the source of the Genesis text.
As to similarities with Gilgamesh and the Bible other than a flood (local in the epic) and a boat (small in the epic) there really aren't any! There are far more similarities in the Sumerian Eridu, Atra-hasis and the Shuruppak than in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Actually the Epic of Gilgamesh dates to about 1050 BC.. References to the Books Moses wrote date to the same period about 1000 BC indicating first there were indeed texts written by Moses, and that those texts were known and fairly widely distributed by that time. If we examine the Genealogies we find that those texts by Moses had to be written no later than 1450 BC a full 400 years before the Epic of Gilgamesh.
It is not difficult to rule out the Ancient Near Eastern mythological texts from being the source of influence for the account of Genesis. While Genesis is reliable, they are not.
An accurate timeline of history is verified and corroborated to the Bible by the discovery of Moses in the 12th Dynasty rather than the 18 or 19th where Egyptian Chronology would place him. The confirmation of Noah in history as a real man, in real events, in real verifiable places, recording history in real time, further corroborates the Bible. Noah's grandson Kush, is named in the Sumerian King’s List; accurate, detailed, verifiable truth with empirical scientific evidence, testable, repeatable, confirmed evidence. Atheists deny the evidence, but cannot refute the evidence and must become delusional to continue their pretense of lies of deception.
Which parts of Genesis can you believe?
Does Genesis give any indication of being a parable? No, the writing style is historical narrative, not poetic.
Is there any part of the origin of matter that goes against science? No.
Are the scientific laws and processes and methods in agreement with the Bible? Yes.
Does the evidence for Creation meet the burden of proof required by scientific method? Yes, in any forum, science, philosophy, or court of law.
Has Noah been confirmed in history as a real man, in real events, in real verifiable places, recording history in real time, literally? Yes, his grandson Kush, is named in the Sumerian King’s List.
Do the genealogies given in the Bible from Jesus all the way back to Adam confirm real people in real places in real history in real time? Yes.
So what part of Genesis or the Bible that asserts volumes of evidence and corroboration could you possibly NOT believe as true?
Let's look at the facts instead of unfounded, unsupported, illogical, irrational, fabricated OPINION: Fact is there is no empirically supported scientific claim that in any way is in conflict with Christianity. The same cannot be said for evolution, abiogenesis, or Big Bang.
Also, Nelson Glueck a Jewish scientist, and universally esteemed as one of the greatest archaeologists, said that no archaeological discovery has ever contradicted the Bible.
The Bible is not a science book, but I'm not aware of ANY instance, where the Bible DOES touch on science, that it has been proven incorrect. How can anyone DENY the evidence of the Bible and the scoreboard, when science corrects itself (proven incorrect?) almost daily?
Foolish men have been attempting to take apart or add to the Bible for millennia, yet it still stands, unchanged truth, more verified by time. By now, we should "know" what the Bible says. Of the top ten Hebrew departments in major cities around the world, there is no debate over what Genesis 1-11 of the Bible "says." Young Earth, literal six day creation. All agree, the narratives of the Creation event and Noah's Flood in Genesis are both literal events of history, documented in technicolor.
But atheists and facts? Unheard of; or show us a single fact, just one! "Please don't say facts, because they don't accept facts as truth. I've tried."
But if you want more facts and are trying to shake this denial thing, detail of the differences between Noah's Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic continued here:
https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20161222110824AAitatt
Sadly, you don't care about truth or anyone but yourself.
Atheists are cowards at heart and can't handle an intelligent response. Their purpose here is to spread doubt - anybody with intelligence can quickly cut through their lies, logical fallacies and reveal them for the fools they are.
Your words ring hollow.