Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>]

This is easy to explain: I have great difficulties believing that Genesis
came into being in Palestine. I have great problems seeing Judaism as
originating in Palestine. I find Mesopotamia a much more likely candidate.
Judaism is exilic in outlook--'next year in Jerusalem'--and very attached to
a specific 'promised' country. And again the myth of the exile has to be
broken down. There were deportations from Palestine at more than one
occasion during the Assyrian and Neo-babylonian times. The OT pays most
attention to the alleged one of 587 BCE (we only have this date from the
Bible--I do not think it unlikely, but it is still part of the biblical
historical narrative), and then we have the alleged decree of Cyrus of 538
sending them back, but as is accepted even by the OT, not all went
home--probably the majority stayed in Mesopotamia, and the Mesopotamian
diaspora did not disappear before 1951 CE, i.e. there was probably a Jewish
presence here since the Neo-Babylonian period and until modern times. 
But if you insist, we can say that the formative period of Judaism was the
5th through 3rd centuries BCE. 300 years is probably enough. It took the
church less time to become the state church of the Roman Empire.

And why should Genesis 1 be contemporary with the composition of Enuma
Elish. That's is mistaking the terminus a quo for the terminus ad quem. We
know of evidence that says that Enuma Elish was still in active use during
the Akitu festival in Neo-Babylonian times. I do not know for how long. It
may have been produced in the Old Babylonian Period or in the Middle
Babylonian period (assyriologists on the list may know the status
quaestionis better than I do), so you have a time span lasting for probably
more than a thousand years. How can you say that Genesis 1 belongs to the
early part of this span of years?

NPL


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee R. Martin [SMTP:lmartin AT vol.com]
> Sent: Monday, 17 January, 2000 17:29
> To:   Niels Peter Lemche; Hebrew List
> Subject:      Re: SV: Gilgamesh
> 
> Dear Niels,
> I have a question about chronology.
> I seem to remember that you believe Genesis to be post-exilic. Is that
> correct?
> Now you are arguing that Genesis borrowed from the Enuma Elish.  Am I
> understanding
> you correctly?
> If so, what evidence is there that the Enuma Elish was in circulation in
> Palestine in
> post-exilic times?  Does a manuscript exist from that time?
> I think it is more reasonable to deduce that Gen. 1 was written very near
> to the same
> time period as the Enuma Elish.  Later redactions are possible, however.
> Lee R. Martin
> 
> Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
> 
>