rob117

I've just finished reading a book called The Babylonian Genesis by Alexander Heidel. It was written in 1942, and provides good translations of the Enuma Elish and other Mesopotamian creation myths. However, in the chapter on relationships to the Old Testament is filled with apologetics. The author attempts minimize the similarities between the biblical material and the Mesopotamian material, and seems incapable of seeing the Bible as just another ancient text to study. He refers to the Bible as "Holy Writ" and attempts to rationalize the story of Yahweh's battle with the Leviathan as a "poetic metaphor" for the story of the Exodus, rather than the straightforward interpretation as a version of the Marduk-Tiamat conflict. He openly defends biblical inerrancy. Despite this, the book was published by the University of Chicago, apparently a normal university. This suggests to me that when the book was written, this was still considered acceptable scholarly conduct, whereas these days defenders of biblical inerrancy are relegated to the fringe in scholarly circles. Does anyone know what the deal was in the 1940s regarding this?

John A. Broussard

As with most university presses, the U of Chi will publish anything that may be of scholarly interest. Publication doesn't mean approval. And, in the case of books, there's little or no attempt at peer review.

Other than that, I can't help you much on what is au courrant in the area of biblical exegesis.