Fw: Seely's Views 2

From: Innovatia <dennis@innovatia.com>
Date: Thu Sep 02 2004 - 23:56:29 EDT

From: PASAlist@aol.com

> As to the Babylonian myths mimicking the biblical creation and Flood stories, the evidence goes the other direction and this rationalization solves nothing. There are several hundred creation stories and over 150 flood stories in the world, but none of them look like the biblical story in any detail except the Babylonian.

> None of the others have a splitting of a primeval sea into two parts, one part of which becomes the sea above the sky and the other half of which becomes the ocean around and under the earth. If the biblical stories were the originals, there would be numerous stories with similar details all over the world passed down by other descendants of Noah.

Might one possibility be that the Genesis stories were reworked later (during or after the exile) to accommodate these Babylonian distinctives but that in other respects are in accord with the more widely distributed stories? If so, then some earlier, generic account congruent with the biblical account might still be the substantial source.

One way this might be checked is by the dating of the Hebrew used in the Genesis text. Is it more recent (exilic-era) Hebrew in Gen. 1-11 and older Hebrew thereafter? K. A. Kitchen makes such an argument of this kind for an early 1st millenium dating of the early OT.

> And what gain is there if the biblical story was first? Science in no way agrees that the ocean was made by splitting a primeval sea in half and using the bottom half to make the oceans. Nor was half of it placed above the sky, above the sun, moon, and stars. The picture is ancient Near Eastern cosmology.

The astrophysicists of the list would know better about the origins of earth's oceans, but is it conceivable that if they came from an extraterrestrial source such as a comet, that part of the comet's water might have fallen to earth while the rest continued overhead.

Is it known why the ancients believed this cosmological scheme in the first place? On the face of it, it hardly seems to fit any simply-observed phenomena, and suggests that in it the ancients might have had another meaning.

Dennis Feucht
Received on Fri Sep 3 11:26:22 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 03 2004 - 11:26:22 EDT