[Note: Todd JQB changed his name earlier, he used to be VX3, and the day before, SEDAGIV]

"As a teacher of biblical history I will have to weigh in and say (username removed) is correct . The 2 different accounts of creation in Genesis 1 & 2 as two separate creation myths from different sources has been the consensus view of scholarship for quite some time. These two 2 mythological accounts were compiled at some point early during the Babylonian exile when the Torah was written."

No, you are both incorrect.

"Actually our opinion in on line with the vast majority of academic biblical scholarship. There is no more debate on this issue the creation account in the Bible is an amalgamation of the Akkadian source known as the Enuma Elish and the Sumerian source known as the Epic of Gilgamesh and also included in some areas both Greek and Phoenician elements. The Genesis creation account was written in between 600 and 400 BC."

No it isn't. You're incorrect in your unsupported statements.

"Your denial of historical facts does not change the reality of my statements that are supported by the overwhelming amount of academic studies of Genesis of the last several decades. I'm sure it will come as a shock but we have a very good idea of the origins of Jehovah and how his worship evolved over time from the cannanite pantheon of gods son of the cheif god El until Jehovah was worshipped as part of a divine couple with his female consort Asherah until around 600 BC. We even have evidence of child sacrifices being done in Israel as part of the worship of Jehovah until the Persian period that lasted until 400 BC."

You can make up whatever you want and call it a "historical fact" to your heart's content. It doesn't make it true. It also doesn't change the reality that your statements are incorrect and quite frankly, ridiculous.

"Well we have now 100 years of archeological data from Isreal and Egypt. We have the Ugaritic Texts discovered in Ras Sharma in 1928 and tablets found in Israel dated to the 8th century that demonstrates the facts stated and these have been part of the standard curriculum of Old Testament studies of every major theological seminary in the Western world for a long time."

You have nothing but speculation based on false information and the bigoted agenda of the anti-religious, anti-Bible crowd.

"I know you are troubled by this but this "information"' has been known for quite some time. The overwhelming majority of scholars are believers and many are committed Christians yet they agree with the conclusions of mainstream scholarship based on on an objective analysis of the historical evidentiary material from both archeological and written sources. The position of biblical minimalism regarding the Old Testament has been the practically unanimous view for a few decades."

I'm not troubled at all, except by the fact that while I reject nonsense, you buy into it. You can keep making absurd sweeping comments ("the overwhelming majority of scholars are believers.....") that you've deluded yourself into believing, but the reality is otherwise.

"It's not a matter of buying into it. These historical facts are part of the academic curriculum. The reality is you don't know what scholars are saying and you don't know what is being taught to students in Old Testament history classes. I know because I am in those classes. Even conservative Biblical colleges agree with the consensus in OT studies."

They're not facts, they're "facts". The reality is you simply are naive enough to buy into anything you read.

"No this is the result of 25 years of experience and research in the field. These "facts" are what is taught in every Old Testament history class. Biblical minimalism represents the practically unanimous view. Here is a good article by Old Testament professor Philip Davies (University of Sheffield) that explains misconceptions on this.
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Minimalism.shtml
I'm on the process of researching my masters dissertation that will basically demonstrate that Judaism resulted by a process of algamation of ancient. Cannanite religion with Zoroastrianism when the Israelites remodeled there religious practices in the image of the religion of Babylon. I will go as far as stating that the New Testament would not exist if the Israelites had not been in exile since most of the concepts that led to the foundation of Christianity were borrowed from the Persians."

Completely incorrect.