Hi Dick:
Thank you. I agree that you can infer that the biblical and other ANE
accounts of creation, flood, and Tower of Babel are related. But it is a
big leap to assume that they are entirely historical, in the sense that
most people use the term historical ---- referring to events in the past
that really did happen, rather than merely something that is based to
some extent on history like a historical novel. A simpler assumption
would be that these accounts are shared mythology.
Let me put things in another way. Would you say that Genesis 1-11
includes an account of some events that are not factual history?
Don
Dick Fischer wrote:
>Hi Don, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Thank you for your response. However, you give no reason why it is
>>>
>>>
>history -- just a statement about why your *assumption* that it is
>history ties in with your understanding of other aspects of ANE
>history.<<
>
>Let me state it another way. All the motifs of Genesis 2-11 can be
>found in adjacent ANE literature. I can find a serpent cult, sacred
>trees, a god dying and coming back to life, a man created by a god out
>of clay, food and water of eternal life, etc. Parallel flood accounts
>are all related. There is a Sumerian version of the Tower of Babel. So
>I conclude that all the stories including the stories in Genesis 2-11
>are related and all are historical. As to whether the Genesis version
>is true or not is another issue. I don't see any compelling reason to
>believe that Genesis is not factual whereas the epic tales are obviously
>inflated.
>
>Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
>Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
>www.genesisproclaimed.org
>
>
>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jun 15 18:08:11 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 15 2006 - 18:08:12 EDT