This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
As it stands, this section needs citations. I suggest that, for example, Blenkinsopp points to the dearth of references to the Primeval History in the rest of the early Bible. TomS TDotO (talk) 10:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't seem to be agreement on this among scholars - each book you read sounds as if the author is quite certain, but the next book disagrees. Blenkinsopp's point is not exactly his own - it's been widely noted. It's true, though - for example, Adam and Eve don't get mentioned until the Hellenistic period (in Sirach I think). That would suggest that the PH is a Hellenistic composition (see Gmirkin, who thinks that all of Genesis is Hellenistic), but I don't think that idea is widely accepted. Another interesting point that I never see in books is that all this reliance on Mesopotamian myths is restricted to the PH - nothing at all outside those 11 chapters. Don't know what to make of that, not that it matters, since there's no RS for it.PiCo (talk) 05:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since you didn't mention it, the reason I never put ISBN numbers in bibliographic entries: they're no more than stock control numbers for publishers. Two print runs of the same edition will have two ISBNs, although there's no difference between them whatsoever. People have far too high an opinion of them. PiCo (talk) 05:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
