The Language of Genesis

Extract

"Despite the common tendency to read Genesis as derived from Babylonian myths or epics, scholarship has now solidly rejected this position. Firstly, if Moses is accepted as the author (somewhere between the 15th–13th century, depending upon your dating method), then it simply makes no sense to read Genesis as a polemic against Babylon, because Babylon only came to prominence as an empire after the 9th century BC.  It is worth reemphasizing that Moses was writing in an Egyptian (or at least, wilderness) context, as mentioned earlier, and not a Babylonian one.  He was therefore hardly likely to write a polemic against a nation that posed no political or theological threat. Secondly, the linguistic evidence has conclusively shown that Genesis does not reveal any demythologizing."

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Infomation

Book Price: £9.99
Paperback 192 pages
ISBN 9781844744060
Published 20/11/2009

Edited by
Norman C. Nevin
Foreword by
Wayne Grudem

Latest Comments

  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    Does Dr. Grudem's equation apply to other scientific theories besides evolution? For example, Christians will listen to a weather forecast that explains the weather in terms o... Read More
    12.02.13 18:43
    By James McAdams
  • Creation, Redemption and Escha...
    Thank you for meeting and available very nice articles. Read More
    22.05.12 10:04
    By Sanghyun Park
  • The Fall and Death
    You object to the idea of death before the Fall. Paul speaks of the cross of Christ and the Fall of Adam as parallel events. We accept that the cross is an eternal event that ... Read More
    25.04.12 14:03
    By Ruth Campbell
  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    I agree that evolutionary thought poses challenges for fundamentalist Christian faith, but I disagree that this means it's not true. Any lay person who spends more than a few ... Read More
    25.07.11 04:09
    By Ryan McGoff
  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    Actually, I think the equation works. The proper mathematical illustration is some say 2+2+0=4, but others say 2+2+God=4, therefore God=0. In your illustration, nobody thinks ... Read More
    22.07.11 18:56
    By Tim
RSS