I think it would be easier if you said you dont know, I dont. we do know these legends grew and were compiled into hebrew mythology over a long period of time. this legend had to take many versions before it hit what you call J. J very well could be the one who compiled it and thus attributed to him.
BUT to claim one author is a serious mistake no respectable OT scholar will make.
besides the Sumerian connection we have hundreds of years of hebrew theology written into this piece
Actually, it is really easy to say that it is attributed to J. That is basic scholarship on the subject. So again, this is attributed to one author, and that is J. Now, if you want to say that it is based on older oral tradition, or other sources, that is fine. But that does not mean that it isn't attributed to J.
And yes, many serious, respectable OT scholars in fact state that the story was written by J, or attributed by J. That doesn't mean that J didn't base his account on other sources. Just that J is the one who this text is attributed.
Also, if you accept that this material was in an older form for quite some time, then you also have to make room for the idea that the Hebrew culture goes back further than you have usually stated. J is usually ascribed to about 950 B.C.E. If the material was in circulation, within the Hebrew community, to the point that it was formed into this nice little source, we have to assume that the Hebrew culture predates that by some time.
Dont use the term "we" because this is all you.
We is actually a pretty standard term. It doesn't necessarily mean that it includes you. Because there is more than just you and me. And no, this is not just all me. Everything I say is based on the vast amount of study I have done on this subject. I can tell you right now, that I'm stating primarily what other scholars have also been saying.
"YOU" dont steer the debate.
with that said i will look into it, from my sources besides wiki
either way, satan was never written in the garden legend, and you agree.
I wasn't steering the debate. This debate has gone a certain way. You then made a claim. I asked you to back up that claim, with specifics. That really isn't steering the debate, as I was directly responding to something you stated.
And yes, I agree that Satan is not written in the garden of Eden. Thus, I figure that it would be worth some effort to try to figure out what the story actually meant then. That means one has to look at the symbology in the story.
As for your Wiki link, it's hogwash. Why? Because it disagrees with many scholars, and even with other wiki links:
Torah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article puts the composition of J to 900 B.C.E.
And here is another Encyclopedia dating it to 950 B.C.E.
Yahwist source (biblical criticism) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia
As for Genesis 2:10-14 placing the garden on some mythological border? Have you read those verses? It places it firmly on Earth. There is no mythological border.
Now, dealing with the "Persian imperial authorisation," it is not talking about just the J source. It really isn't even talking about what we were discussing. Instead, it is talking about the Torah as a whole. So really, it doesn't work for a real argument here.
As for the Atra Hasis (I do find it funny you actually don't point out anything specific, but instead, just another creation story, which you found in your wiki link), is more similar to the flood story. However, yes, there are some similarities, but they are probably better explained by the fact that they contain pretty much standard symbology for that area. I do have a question though. Have you ever read said text?
