Re: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things previously)

From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Fri Feb 22 2002 - 16:33:06 EST

  • Next message: Jonathan Clarke: "Re: Russ Humphreys"

    Walt,

        If you don't mind going to old-fashioned printed sources for a
    comparison of the "Enuma elish" with Genesis 1, I recommend the following:
        GENESIS: Introduction, Translation and Notes by A. E. Speiser. The
    Anchor Bible, vol. 1, p. 8-13. Speiser, an expert on ancient Near Eastern
    languages (the joke was the when he and his wife wanted to communicate
    privately in public, they conversed in Middle Akkadian III), gives a good
    comparison of the two texts.
        THE BABYLONIAN GENESIS, by Alexander Heidel. U. Chicago Press, 1951.
    Chapter III examines OT parallels.

    Sincerely,
    Bob Schneider
    rjschn39@bellsouth.net

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Walter Hicks" <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
    To: <PHSEELY@aol.com>
    Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
    Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 4:04 PM
    Subject: Re: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things
    previously)

    > Hi paul,
    >
    > I was trying to restrict my discussion to Genesis chapter 1. The
    > remainder of Genesis is quite different in nature. Also I am more
    > impressed in the accurate portions of Genesis 1 than I am disturbed buy
    > the inaccurate part.
    >
    > I have tried to find The material on "Enuma elish" on the web and get
    > nothing that looks similar to Genesis Chapter one. Would you have any
    > suggestions?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Walt
    >
    >
    > PHSEELY@aol.com wrote:
    > >
    > > Wally wrote,
    > >
    > > << Back in the late 60's, Eric Von Daniken wrote a book called "Chariots
    of
    > > the Gods?". I DO NOT ENDORSE THIS BOOK!. However, the author voices the
    > > opinion that humans were visited by astronauts and they were told by
    > > them how the earth and humanity came about. As best they could, they
    > > remembered this story and repeated it from generation to generation.
    > > They wrote it down when they had learned how to write. (A recent
    > > Discovery Channel presentation attributed the first books of the Bible
    > > to Moses since he learned to write in Egypt.)
    > >
    > > Replace the astronauts with God or the HS and is this not a credible
    > > story?
    > >
    > > Walt
    > > >>
    > >
    > > It doesn't fit the historical evidence. If God revealed the story of
    > > creation, that is, the story we have in Gen 1 to Adam, it should have
    come
    > > down through Noah and his 3 sons to all peoples. But, the only two
    creation
    > > stories that substantially look like each other are Gen 1 and the
    Babylonian
    > > creation account, Enuma elish. All peoples have the solid firmament, but
    only
    > > a teeny tiny few have an ocean above the firmament, and only Gen 1 and
    E.e.
    > > tell about the dividing of the waters; and in both accounts the waters
    that
    > > are divided are from the Semitic root thm.Given the rest of the
    Babylonian
    > > background to Gen 1-11, it is just too probable that the story of
    creation,
    > > like the Flood story, began with a Babylonian story.
    > >
    > > Paul
    >
    > --
    > ===================================
    > Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
    >
    > In any consistent theory, there must
    > exist true but not provable statements.
    > (Godel's Theorem)
    >
    > You can only find the truth with logic
    > If you have already found the truth
    > without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
    > ===================================
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 22 2002 - 17:10:41 EST