The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Bible. Which came first?

Genesis 8:4 says that Noah's ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the 7th month. Exodus 12:2 indicates that the 7th month was changed to the 1rst month at Yahweh's command. The month in which the ark rested on land by the civil calender was the 7th month. But by the new sacred calender commenced from the Exodus 12 it was the 1rst month.The civil calender was the old one and the sacred calender was the new one. The Passover was to be celebrated in the 1rst month of Abid (Exo. 13:4). Abid means sprouting, budding, fresh ears of corn. This signified that the Passover in the first month of the new sacred calender was counted in God's eyes as a new beginning of life.Jesus Christ was crucified on the day of the Passover, on the 14th day of the month (Exo.12:6; John 18:28). According to the sacred calender, He was crucified in the first month, and according to the civil calender , He was crucified in the seventh month.Christ crucified - in the 1rst month (sacred calender)
Christ crucified - in the 7th month (civil calender)Christ was crucified on the 14th day of the month and resurrected 3 days latter of the sacred calender. That means that three days latter would have been on the 17th day of the 7th month according to the civil calender. The ark of Noah with its saved inhabitants came to rest on the land on the 17th day of the 7th month. This was the same day in which Jesus Christ resurrected according to the sacred calender.So, in Genesis the resting of the ark upon the mountains of Ararat foretold the exact date of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.Was this coincidence? I believe it was divine typology. The Apostle Peter connects the resurrection of Christ to the ark in 1 Peter 3:20-21 saying: "eight souls, were brought safely through water: which figure also now saves you, baptism ... through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." The saving ark of Noah resting upon the mountaintop signified Christ's resurrection out from the death waters. The month and day of both were exactly the same.This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 04:16 PM

========================
So you do recognize that the Flood story is a story about salvation, not a story about a flood. Good.As for the numerology, I don't have much use for that, but I'll leave it to somebody else to check your figures. (It's also off topic.)
=======================================I think that Christ is the centrality of the entire Bible. If you mean that it is a story about salvation verses actual history, I don't agree with that.I believe that the flood is something that happened and in God's sovereignty it has a significance in New Testament salvation.That other cultures wrote of such an event embellished to meet local needs would not surprise me in the least. As the account was handed down from generation to generation after the flood I would expect that embellishments would be added.I also would not be surprised if some of these version of the biblical flood showed up in ancient writings pre-dating the writing of Genesis. My faith enfluences me to regard the Genesis account as the genuine story, though it may have been written down after embellished versions appeared elsewhere.I'm rather new here and will learn to stay on topic soon if I have introduced something off the topic. Bear with me for a little bit at least.