Reviewed Book: Batto, Bernard F. Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical tradition. Louisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992

DeBoer, Catherine

English

Scholars Commons

Consensus
Volume 19
Issue 1 Martin Luther and Spirituality Article 11
5-1-1993
Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical
tradition
Catherine DeBoer
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus
This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an
authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
DeBoer, Catherine (1993) "Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical tradition," Consensus: Vol. 19 : Iss. 1 , Article 11.
Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol19/iss1/11
Book Reviews 171
Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in The Biblical Tra-
dition
Bernard F. Batto
Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992
232 pp.
Today, there are many books available on the subject of myth. However,
unlike many of them Batto’s book. Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in
The Biblical Tradition^ is based on solid research. Batto’s use of primary
sources, his strong background in the Ugaritic and Akkadian languages, his
sensitivity to the dating and historical development of texts, and his use of
archaeological evidence qualify this book to be taken seriously.
Batto defines myth as “a narrative (story) concerning the fundamental
symbols that are constitutive of or paradigmatic for human existence” (11).
He admits that traditionally both Jews and Christians have viewed history
as the chief medium of revelation, and myth to be its antithesis (1). Myths
have been viewed as primitive and pagan falsehoods based on ignorance
and superstition and things which are not in any way connected to the holy
and divinely inspired word of God. Batto’s book challenges this view.
Batto’s thesis is that myth was one of the “chief mediums by which
biblical writers did their theologizing” (1) and hence a medium of revelation
(153). These writers borrowed myths from their Near Eastern neighbours
and extended them to refiect their own theology and view of God. His book
serves as a case study of this type of methodology, known as mythopoeism,
as found in the primeval and exodus stories and the prophetic literature.
Batto grounds his thesis in the Documentary Hypothesis which pro-
poses that the pentateuch is composed of four literary traditions—the Yah-
wist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and Priestly traditions (J, E, D, and P re-
spectively). In spite of the current academic attacks on this hypothesis,
Batto uses it because of its value in a broad sense in explaining the devel-
opment of* the pentateuch. However, following Frank Cross’s modifications
to the theory, Batto suggests that the Priestly writer never contributed a
literary strand to the pentateuch as such, but incorporated his own material
into the two already existing strands (J and E), reworking them while still
preserving them. This modified Documentary Hypothesis is an essential
foundation to Batto’s thesis as it allows him to date the J texts as older
than the P texts and thus trace the development or transformation of the
myths used in each.
Batto suggests that the Yahwist used the Babylonian myths of Atrahasis
and Gilgamesh to present his view of Yahweh as the sovereign God and
creator of the universe. Like the Atrahasis myth the Yahwist myth attempts
to show that this world was created by a loving if somewhat fioundering
God, who learning from his mistakes was eventually able to clearly define
the boundaries between God and humanity. For the Yahwist, as for the
author of Gilgamesh^ immortality was one of these distinctions between
the divine and humanity.
172 Consensus
According to Batto the Priestly writer used the Babylonian combat
myth of Enuma elish to advance his theology of monotheism. The Priestly
writer reworks the story of creation by replacing the floundering God of the
Yahwist with a perfect one. Thus the view of the fall replaces the Yahwist ’s
view of God slowly coming to terms with his flawed creations. The Priestly
writer uses the combat myth as the foundation for his account of Israel’s
captivity in Egypt and their crossing of the Red Sea. Both are seen as
having cosmic signiflcance. Yahweh’s victory over Pharaoh as depicted in
the dividing of the Red Sea was actually a reworking of the primeval myth
of Yahweh’s victory over the water of chaos as evident in both the creation
and the flood stories.
Batto’s book is presented in a clear fashion. He keeps his reader in-
formed of both the content and the development of his argument by pre-
senting the data from which his conclusions are drawn and by summarizing
these conclusions at the end of each chapter, building on them as the book
develops. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the develop-
ment of ancient Israelite religion in general, and to those who are interested
in the primeval and exodus stories in particular. This book contributes to
our understanding of these stories and helps to place them within the con-
text of the ancient Near East.
The main disappointment is the absence of any discussion on the impli-
cations for both the believer and the scholar of viewing myth as a medium
of revelation. For those who view history and myth as antithetical and for
those who have little background knowledge of the Babylonian myths used
in the analysis, Batto’s conclusions may be disturbing and perhaps even
offensive.
Catherine de Boer
University of Toronto
Josephus and the New Testament
Steve Mason
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992
248 pp. U.S. $9.95
The New Testament has been the object of intensive scrutiny for cen-
turies. The drive to understand the fundamental text of Christianity has
meant that nearly every angle has been tried, nearly every scrap of evi-
dence pressed into service. It seems strange, then, that arguably the most
important extra-biblical writer for understanding the NT has never until
now had a book for general readers relating his work to the NT itself. The
writer is the first century Jewish historian Josephus; the book is Josephus
and the New Testament, and it was worth the wait.


Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical tradition

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 19Issue 1 Martin Luther and Spirituality Article 115-1-1993Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblicaltraditionCatherine DeBoerFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationDeBoer, Catherine (1993) "Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical tradition," Consensus: Vol. 19 : Iss. 1 , Article 11.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol19/iss1/11Book Reviews 171Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in The Biblical Tra-ditionBernard F. BattoLouisville, Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992232 pp.Today, there are many books available on the subject of myth. However,unlike many of them Batto’s book. Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking inThe Biblical Tradition^ is based on solid research. Batto’s use of primarysources, his strong background in the Ugaritic and Akkadian languages, hissensitivity to the dating and historical development of texts, and his use ofarchaeological evidence qualify this book to be taken seriously.Batto defines myth as “a narrative (story) concerning the fundamentalsymbols that are constitutive of or paradigmatic for human existence” (11).He admits that traditionally both Jews and Christians have viewed historyas the chief medium of revelation, and myth to be its antithesis (1). Mythshave been viewed as primitive and pagan falsehoods based on ignoranceand superstition and things which are not in any way connected to the holyand divinely inspired word of God. Batto’s book challenges this view.Batto’s thesis is that myth was one of the “chief mediums by whichbiblical writers did their theologizing” (1) and hence a medium of revelation(153). These writers borrowed myths from their Near Eastern neighboursand extended them to refiect their own theology and view of God. His bookserves as a case study of this type of methodology, known as mythopoeism,as found in the primeval and exodus stories and the prophetic literature.Batto grounds his thesis in the Documentary Hypothesis which pro-poses that the pentateuch is composed of four literary traditions—the Yah-wist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and Priestly traditions (J, E, D, and P re-spectively). In spite of the current academic attacks on this hypothesis,Batto uses it because of its value in a broad sense in explaining the devel-opment of* the pentateuch. However, following Frank Cross’s modificationsto the theory, Batto suggests that the Priestly writer never contributed aliterary strand to the pentateuch as such, but incorporated his own materialinto the two already existing strands (J and E), reworking them while stillpreserving them. This modified Documentary Hypothesis is an essentialfoundation to Batto’s thesis as it allows him to date the J texts as olderthan the P texts and thus trace the development or transformation of themyths used in each.Batto suggests that the Yahwist used the Babylonian myths of Atrahasisand Gilgamesh to present his view of Yahweh as the sovereign God andcreator of the universe. Like the Atrahasis myth the Yahwist myth attemptsto show that this world was created by a loving if somewhat fiounderingGod, who learning from his mistakes was eventually able to clearly definethe boundaries between God and humanity. For the Yahwist, as for theauthor of Gilgamesh^ immortality was one of these distinctions betweenthe divine and humanity.172 ConsensusAccording to Batto the Priestly writer used the Babylonian combatmyth of Enuma elish to advance his theology of monotheism. The Priestlywriter reworks the story of creation by replacing the floundering God of theYahwist with a perfect one. Thus the view of the fall replaces the Yahwist ’sview of God slowly coming to terms with his flawed creations. The Priestlywriter uses the combat myth as the foundation for his account of Israel’scaptivity in Egypt and their crossing of the Red Sea. Both are seen ashaving cosmic signiflcance. Yahweh’s victory over Pharaoh as depicted inthe dividing of the Red Sea was actually a reworking of the primeval mythof Yahweh’s victory over the water of chaos as evident in both the creationand the flood stories.Batto’s book is presented in a clear fashion. He keeps his reader in-formed of both the content and the development of his argument by pre-senting the data from which his conclusions are drawn and by summarizingthese conclusions at the end of each chapter, building on them as the bookdevelops. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the develop-ment of ancient Israelite religion in general, and to those who are interestedin the primeval and exodus stories in particular. This book contributes toour understanding of these stories and helps to place them within the con-text of the ancient Near East.The main disappointment is the absence of any discussion on the impli-cations for both the believer and the scholar of viewing myth as a mediumof revelation. For those who view history and myth as antithetical and forthose who have little background knowledge of the Babylonian myths usedin the analysis, Batto’s conclusions may be disturbing and perhaps evenoffensive.Catherine de BoerUniversity of TorontoJosephus and the New TestamentSteve MasonPeabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992248 pp. U.S. $9.95The New Testament has been the object of intensive scrutiny for cen-turies. The drive to understand the fundamental text of Christianity hasmeant that nearly every angle has been tried, nearly every scrap of evi-dence pressed into service. It seems strange, then, that arguably the mostimportant extra-biblical writer for understanding the NT has never untilnow had a book for general readers relating his work to the NT itself. Thewriter is the first century Jewish historian Josephus; the book is Josephusand the New Testament, and it was worth the wait.

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1823&amp;context=consensus

Slaying the dragon: mythmaking in the biblical tradition

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons

Wilfrid Laurier University