ier traditions,
belonging, properly speaking, to Mesopotamia rather than to
Jewish history, the exact meaning of which the writers of the
Pentateuch seem hardly to have appreciated when they
transcribed them in the form in which they are now
found."[99:2]

John Fiske says:

"The story of the Serpent in Eden is an Aryan story in every
particular. The notion of Satan as the author of evil appears
only in the later books, _composed after the Jews had come
into close contact with Persian ideas_."[99:3]

Prof. John W. Draper says:

"In the old legends of dualism, the evil spirit was said to
have _sent a serpent to ruin Paradise_. These legends became
known to the Jews _during their Babylonian captivity_."[99:4]

Professor Goldziher also shows, in his "Mythology Among the
Hebrews,"[99:5] that the story of the creation was borrowed by the
Hebrews from the Babylonians. He also informs us that the notion of the
_bore_ and _yoser_, "Creator" (the term used in the cosmogony in
Genesis) as an integral part of the idea of God, _are first brought into
use by the prophets of the captivity_. "Thus also the story of the
_Garden of Eden_, as a supplement to the history of the Creation, _was
written down at Babylon_."

Strange as it may appear, after the _Genesis_ account, we may pass
through the whole Pentateuch, and other books of the Old Testament,
clear to the end, and will find that the story of the "_Garden of Eden_"
and "_Fall of Man_," is hardly alluded to, if at all. Lengkerke says:
"One single _certain_ trace of the employment of the story of Adam's
fall is entirely wanting in the Hebrew Canon (after the Genesis
account). Adam, Eve, the Serpent, the woman's seduction of her husband,
&c., are all images, _to which the remaining words of the Israelites
never again recur_."[100:1]

This circumstance can only be explained by the fact that the first
chapters of Genesis were not written until _after_ the other portions
had been written.

It is worthy of notice, that this story of the Fall of Man, upon which
the whole orthodox scheme of a divine Saviour or Redeemer is based, was
_not_ considered by the learned Israelites as _fact_. They simply looked
upon it as a story which satisfied the ignorant, but which should be
considered as _allegory_ by the learned.[100:2]

Rabbi Maimonides (Moses Ben Maimon), one of the most celebrated of the
Rabbis, says on this subject