If you think Genesis 1 belongs in the panoply of other creation stories, or that it copied some of them, I challenge you to actually read those other creation stories and compare them with Genesis 1. The differences are striking. These stories are not even in the same category.

Elements of pagan creation stories:

- chaotic pre-existing cosmos
- first god emerges from the chaos
- produces lots of other gods
- personal drama, warring between gods
- the world and humans made from the corpse of a dead god
- objects like the Sun and Moon personified by gods

Style of pagan creation stories:

- lengthy prose
- dramatic language

Not all non-Abrahamic creation stories follow this exact pattern, but many of them, including the ones supposedly "copied" by the Genesis author, do.

Elements of Genesis 1:

- creation of the universe from nothing by an eternal, immaterial God
- physical objects, incl. human bodies, made from the raw material of creation
- God-centered
- no personal drama
- filled with testable claims about the physical world

Style of Genesis 1:

- succinct
- austere in prose
- matter-of-face in tone

There are, of course, commonalities between all creation stories. That is expected, as part of a shared way of looking at the world for ancient cultures, which included the supernatural, order from chaos, light out of darkness, water, etc. Part of it is also explained...

...by what C.S. Lewis observed as a general recognition of elements of universal truths. If Genesis 1 is true (which I obviously believe), then we should expect other traditions to have access to at least some parts of that truth. If we fold in the theology of Heiser, then...

...all of the personal drama with the multitude of pagan gods also begins to make some sense.

Despite some thematic similarities, Genesis 1 is unique among creation stories. Don't be fooled by the fake news that Genesis is just borrowed mythology. Read and compare for yourself!