Is R)$YT even a "time" word?
dwashbur at nyx.net
Mon Mar 25 10:08:27 EST 2002
> >I have never bought the whole Tiamat/Tehom parallel
> >and all that. In any such situation, one can look at the similarities
> >and assume they are derived from each other,
> We are not necessarily deriving one from the other.
> The important information we get is the missing
> details in Genesis when we look at the Enuma Elish.
The notion that Enuma Elish supplies "missing details in Genesis" is
another assumption that I don't buy. To show this, a definitive and
demonstrable connection between the two in terms of where they
came from, how they developed, how they diverged and how
particular details came to be included or excluded from one or the
other, must be shown. We can't simply assume that one has
"missing details" and the other doesn't. Again, when a statement
like this is made in the context of what we know regarding the two
stories, it is pure speculation, nothing more. You're welcome to
assume this sort of connection, but I don't think you'll ever be able to
provide definitive evidence for it. So speculate away, just don't
expect the speculation to be taken as anything more than that.
This time, like all times, is a very good one if we but know what to do
More information about the b-hebrew