“In summary, then, it is difficult to discuss comparisons between Israelite and Mesopotamian literature concerning creation of the cosmos because the disparity is so marked. Differences include elemental issues such as theogony versus cosmogony, polytheism versus monotheism, and emphasis on organisization versus emphasis on creative act. Similarities are either linguistic in nature or, as in most caes, due to the fact that the accounts are descriptive of the cosmos of which both are a part” (John H Walton, Ancient Israelite Literature in its Cultural Context, 1989.
The main error in times past was in assuming that the Enuma elish was ancient myth, whereas it is now realised it is a late and political polemic to promote Marduk, Babylon’s local deity.
Some people think this others don’t. This is beside the point for many Chrisitans. Even if there was source material, we might hold that the processes of editing it was inspired to insert theological and/or historical truth.
I think Genesis is not a stable place on which to ground ones belief in God. There are many plausible readings, including a variant of yours. I find a confident faith another way.
What draws me to Genesis is that it is timeless, engaging the grand questions, and is open ended. Grand questions are existential questions and that’s why we find so much conflict here. It is an opportunity to seek peace in a place of real significance.
Plausibility is strongly determined by our preexisting perspective, and I can legitimately see things from different points of view.
I’m hesitant to present my own opinions because I don’t think my opinions are the most important thing in the room. Rather than advocating for myself, or trying to appear impartial, I want to be impartial.
I’m admittedly selective in my mecuriality. I confess up front that I affirm evolutionary science, I’m unconvinced by ID, and believe Jesus rose from the dead.
Did the writer expect the reader/listener to know where they placed EDen and the garden?
The garden was only in a part of eden by the way.
I say the readers would know these rivers did not connect and so would know the flood destroyed the original landscape. Likewise no more angel with a sword was needed.
It says there was a river that then divided into four rivers. this is a excellent proof of the bibnle as Gods word.
For in a perfecxt world there would be no rivers as we have them now. All our rivers are errors. They only exist because of unnatural holes in the ground which pooled water and then overflow.(Except the unnatural mountain cases). Also no source for water to fall on earth.
So before the fall a river could only exist from underground and so it would then divide as it came out of the ground.
The names indicate impossible connections. Eden is gone and the reasder was to understand this. The writer never meant the reader could travel there.
That was the point. It didn’t exist anymore.