Stories work best. We’re all susceptible to them. As Yuval Noah Harari demonstrates in Nexus, we absorb them far more readily than cold hard facts, evidence, statistics. A narrative means much more to us, which is why humans have told stories since we evolved the ability to speak and, later – much later – write.
The gospel authors knew this and dressed up their beliefs about their heavenly saviour as stories about a man who lived and died in Galilee a few decades earlier. As we know, these stories became popular, were repeated and reshaped down the years by the church, still drawing people in today. They are effective because they’re memorable: the Nativity, the temptation in the wilderness, the miracles, the trial before Pilate, the crucifixion and resurrection are all well constructed narratives that draw on archetypes of human experience.
Within these stories, Jesus is made to tell his own: he, or more likely his writers, knew this was the best way to drive a point home. Even today, many people know at least the outline of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son and the Lost Sheep. Only a few can repeat, far less explain, Paul’s convoluted theology from Romans. The gospels are effective because they, and the stories within them, are well put together, relatable and memorable. This does not, however, mean they’re true in any meaningful sense.
That’s the problem with stories. It’s difficult to know whether they’re true (as in factual), convey (universal) truths, contain some element of truth or are entirely untrue. What we need to do is search for any evidence that supports or refutes them. Very often we don’t. We accept them on the basis of their plausibility or on the authority of those telling them. Their pedigree plays a part too – as with ancient religious claims – as does the way they’re often accepted uncritically by other people. Our own predisposition to believe certain stories (but not others) is a factor too. Then there’s the way that constant repetition of stories endows them with the ‘illusion of truth’ or, as Nazi leaders put it, ‘repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.’ It’s a maxim still applied today.
Not many of us hunt down the evidence for ourselves, and sometimes there isn’t any to hunt down: did George Washington really chop down his father’s cherry tree and follow it with his ‘I cannot tell a lie’ shtick? Probably not, but there’s no way of knowing for sure – and surely millions of people who do believe it can’t all be wrong. Very often we are complicit in our own conditioning.
How about stories that circulate today? Next time I’d like to offer some examples. In the meantime if you have any suspect narratives we’re subject to, please let me know.
rejectingjesus, 
When you think about it, every narrative is a story. But as you know that isn’t the whole story (pun intended). Stories come in a variety of genre from news stories, which used to be a report of something that happened based only on facts, to narrative poetry and ballads. The stories in the Bible are not news stories. There was no such thing at the time they were composed. To read them as news stories is a mistake. But if we read them as they were intended, wonderful insights emerge.
The stories in the Bible also are not myths, not as we define myth today. You can find myths in the ancient Sumerian literature.
One of my most interesting projects has been to examine the primeval oral traditions of Genesis 2-11 from the point of view of culture and literature..
The earliest of those stories is probably the oldest story in the world and dates to around 12,000 years ago. It is told in the form and style of an oral tradition and has the marks of that genre. It is not a news story. It is not even a historical narrative as we think of that genre. It is a sacred story and an allegory mixed with real details that were probably added by the editor when it was transcribed 8,000 years later. It should be read as a literary piece based on a real event that happened in time and place about the time of Gobekli tepe, in fact, and in approx the same location. When we do, we find itr is remarkable and amazing. And the truth (all good literature is intended to convey truth) is worth pondering.Enjoy the read, my friends. .
LikeLiked by 1 person
So tell me if I’ve got this right, Don:
The Bible is not news reporting; it is not therefore factually true, even though millions of your fellow Christians ‘mistakenly’ think it is;
The Bible should be read like any other work of fiction (A Tale of Two Cities was your comparison);
While the Bible is fiction it is most definitely not myth (even though at least some of it, like the Nativity, Abraham and Isaac, the Exodus etc etc, most certainly is);
The Bible should not, as a result, be read as myth.
So tell us, Don, just how should the Bible be read, now you’ve dismssed all these possibilities? (My money is on you saying ‘as metaphor’ even though you’ve previously been unable to tell us what it is a metaphor for, not forgetting that ancient metaphorical stories are essentially myth.)
I’m sure you’ll know best!
LikeLiked by 2 people
You are using a semantic trap, Neil. I am trying to be clear, but we are reading from different dictionaries.
News reporting as a genre follows the usual guidelines of newspapers. It is just the facts. But there are other genres like history. History is not news reporting. It is a narrative created from facts that ties the facts together in a causal relationship.It does not need to report every fact. But there is also rarely unbiased historiography. The same story of a battle in the 2nd WW told by an American writer and a Japanese writer will be different. We Americans might say THEY are spinning the account, but we both know that everyone spins the account to make their own point. So, in the Bible, some history is hero story without an attempt to be unbiased. That is what the Egyptian histories were.
When we demand something like unbiased reporting we will rarely get it in ancient literature. But you know that.
You know about reading fiction. Fiction,- good fiction – is not intended to simply entertain. It has a thesis, As The Tale of Two Cities has. It is illustrating a point of view the author has. That is the comparison I was making. I do not say there are no actual fiction stories in the Bible. But it is difficult to say for sure. Esther may be. But even that genre mixes things up as in historical fiction. We usually read historical fiction as historically based but having a fictional plot. There may be real people portrayed, but there will be fictional characters as well. I like historical fiction because the authors often paint a picture of the place and times we don’t get in history.
Myth is a genre that is understood so differently by different people that I try not to use it. I prefer either sacred stories or traditions. They are often highly stylized and theological, at least in ancient literature. They may be based on a real event, like the flood or the tower of Babel or on real people Like Jesse James. But they may also be completely fictional. But in even folk myths there is a reason for their creation other than entertainment. They carry a message or express a truth that the author and those who [ass them on believe to be important. So if you are going to continue to use “myth” you’ll need to define what you mean. You might also explain why you think Abraham is a myth.
Metaphor is not technically a genre. Allegory is. Metaphors are comparisons between two different things often intended to give a more concrete or sensual description for a common event or thing. For example, the wind beat wildly upon the old cabin like a child with a toy drum rattling the tin plates in the cupboard.
The Bible does use metaphor and many other figures of speech. Hebrew in particular was a very literary language. But that should not be too difficult for you. Unless you come to the Bible expecting it to be simple and straightforward without the nuances of figurative language and the varied genre. Maybe that is part of your old Fundamentalist assumptions.
I know you understand these things, Neil. But others visiting the blog may not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A semantic trap, eh? Not unlike those Jesus used against the Pharisees.
So you’re going for historical fiction this time round. Fiction then, with a quasi-historical bent. At last we agree! As we might expect, the gospels fall into this category too. (Incidentally, I didn’t claim that metaphor was a genre but thank you for explaining it to me [snark]).
Real history, as I’ve pointed out before, does not involve angels, wandrin’ stars, devils, demons, miracles and resurrections. The Greek and Roman scholars contemporaneous with the gospels knew this, so the gospel writers have no excuse. They weren’t writing history, Don, they were creating propaganda. End of discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s easy to shoot you down, Don, based on factual issues with your claims. (You having no material evidence to link the mythical Noah to Göbekli Tepe, for example.) But there’s a bigger problem with your claims.
You claim that some Hebrew scribe eventually took existing myths, mixed in “real details”, and ended up with something more than myth that you don’t name. (Maybe, “super myth” or “myth++”. Let’s go with myth++.)
What I find interesting about this is that you don’t seem to respect the myth++ that is in the Bible. You are constantly trying to get your myth++ to line up with reality.
You assert that the Hebrew exodus from Egypt was a gradual migration rather than a massive single event as described in the myth++.
You claim that Noah’s flood was a limited local event rather than the global one described in the myth++.
You insist on calling the gospels history or biography rather than myth++.
Why, Don, do you disrespect the myth++ like that? Own your myth++! Be proud of it! Tell us damned apostates that the stories didn’t actually happen the way described but they are still True™.
Why do you hide behind your pseudo-science, and pseudo-history, and pseudo-archeology? Are you ashamed of the myth++ of Christ, Don?
LikeLike
Actually, if you have followed my thinking over the years, I don’t think the gospels are STRICTLY history or biography. They are euaggelion. That is the word for announcement of good news. (It is a legit genre and used by the Romans before being picked up by the gospel writers.)
That does not mean the gospels are myth++. They and the exodus and the flood, etc. are sacred stories. They tell about God’s interaction with men and are firmly based in real events and places. And that is what distinguishes them from myth++. More firmly based in real events than you seem to realize. For example, the flood did happen. It is told apocalyptically and has therefore features that seem unreal, but no more than some of the reports today of real events by the people who experienced them. Ever heard anyone say, “I have never seen the water this high.” Sure, I do every time there is a big flood.
Truth. As a literature guy, you know that literature speaks a truth that is more powerful than a mere factual account. I could point to any number of poems from Engsh literature and so could you to illustrate that. But let’s take Tennyson’s “Charge of the Light Brigade.” Did that happen? Yes. 1853. Where? Balaclava, Crimea. But the point of the poem was not to report the battle. What was it, Neil? You know. It was to celebrate the bravery and heroism of the men of the brigade. And it does so more powerfully than any news report or history book has ever done or could ever do. In a similar way the Bible stories I’ve mention and more take real events and make the significant things in the events – for the writer or composers this was God’s part in the event – stand out. Why? Because they saw what God did as the powerful truth.
Many of these things are told as stories. Again as a literature guy, you know that the facts of an event are not stories. They do not have the structure or plot flow of a story. Most importantly, they do not have a thesis. For those who aren’t literary freaks, a thesis is the point of the story. The message.
Every story has a thesis. It may not be stated out loud. It may even be an emotional reaction. It may be subtle, but the story was told for a reason. Any it was told in many cases for the original readers in the context of their lives and history and culture. What do you think the first readers took away from the exodus story? What do you think the first readers took away from the gospels. I am sure it is not what you are taking away.
But good literature is universal. It speaks across cultures and time. And the gospels have proven over 2000 years that they are universal. Jesus appeals to men and women everywhere. Why? Because the truth is universal.
LikeLike
Euaggelion: what the rest of us call propaganda.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think of propaganda as a pejorative term. But that probably reflects my Spanish language experience. Youn can think of it however you like. I suppose when the Romans sent out criers to announcer an edict of the emperor, it was one sided and laced with optimism. Okay. I can go with that.
LikeLike
Never let it be said, Don, that you wear your learning lightly. ‘Propaganda’, however, is derived from Latin; why you drag Spanish into it is a mystery.
As for your repeated assertion that you follow Jesus: you ‘follow’ a construct of him created in and by your own mind. Again you provide an example of someone you say has done wonderful things because of Jesus. Great, but we could equally proffer examples of people who’ve done awful things in his name. You mention Trump; 80% of evangelicals voted for him in 2024. Yes, followers of Jesus are responsible for the havoc your president is now inflicting on the world.
And don’t try your shaming tactics here either. Did we help with your friend’s project in Pakistan? You know we didn’t. Did you help with projects I am invested in? No. Shame on you! (You see what a senseless argument this is?)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anonymous Don sed: Actually, if you have followed my thinking over the years, I don’t think the gospels are STRICTLY history or biography. They are euaggelion. That is the word for announcement of good news. (It is a legit genre and used by the Romans before being picked up by the gospel writers.)
Yes, I know. It was a word used in stories of Caesars or other heroes who were taken into heaven to become gods.
Do you know the symbolism behind the Star of Bethlehem™, Don? See when great men died, they ascended into heaven to become gods. All the stars in the sky are men who became gods. Heaven is lousy with men who became gods. (And so you don’t nitpick: by Jesus’ time, it had switched so that great men’s stars appeared at their birth rather than their death. But the meaning was the same – they were exalted to become gods.)
Jesus’ story isn’t in anyway original or unique. Thanks for reminding us of that.
Anonymous Don sed: That does not mean the gospels are myth++. They and the exodus and the flood, etc. are sacred stories. They tell about God’s interaction with men and are firmly based in real events and places. And that is what distinguishes them from myth++.
First, let’s address you calling your myths “sacred stories.”
Look around. Most of our stories – in literature, film, computer games, etc. – are fiction. Good fiction reflex the real world in some way, but it’s still fiction. So changing “myth” to “stories” is like insisting people say “film” instead of “movie.” It’s a distinction without a difference.
And “sacred.” Most people consider their myths sacred. You’re adding nothing to the conversation with your preferred wording. Yes. We know you think your myths are special.
What we continue to ask for is evidence of that. But all you ever offer is word games. I’m sure it’s impressive to people who believe as you do. But to the rest of us, it’s just so much noise saying nothing of value.
Second, your “sacred myths” are in no way “firmly based in real events.” Sorry, they are myths based on older myths which were based in still older myths. “Real events” don’t come into it.
Anonymous Don sed: For example, the flood did happen. It is told apocalyptically and has therefore features that seem unreal, but no more than some of the reports today of real events by the people who experienced them. Ever heard anyone say, “I have never seen the water this high.” Sure, I do every time there is a big flood.
Over the years, I’ve helped a lot of neighbors fill and place sandbags when the forecast was for local flooding. And I’ve helped them clean out their basements when there wasn’t enough warning to sandbag properly. And I’ve heard a lot of “highest water ever.” People exaggerate. People forget how bad the last was over time.
You know what I’ve never heard, Don? No one ever said “last time it filled the whole earth” or that it “covered the tops of the mountains.” I’ve stood in roads hip deep in water, but I could always see the mountains just a few miles away.
There are exaggerations and there are outright lies. The foundation myths of the Hebrews and the Christians are lies.
You know how I know? Because you and others never defend your myths with evidence. You always defend them with more stories. More stories and more excuses for why your stories don’t match real history.
You have a big book of fairy tales. Fine. You think it speaks Truths™ better than any other big book of fairy tales. Fine. But they aren’t any better than other fairy tales.
LikeLike
Kos: But the meaning was the same.
NOT. Here is where a little knowledge of the Jewish scriptures help. “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel.” (Num. 24:17) For the Jews a star meant a king. And that is consistently what it means when it is intended to be symbolic through scripture.
Kos: “And “sacred.” Most people consider their myths sacred.”
I mean by “sacred” that they have to do with God or gods and their interaction with men. That is as true of the Sumerian myths as the biblical myths. But to make the distinction between fiction and sacred story, I try to avoid “myth.” It has the connotation today of fiction. It is not.
Kos: “Second, your “sacred myths” are in no way “firmly based in real events.”
I differ on that. They are explanations of real things or events. The flood story, for example, comes from an actual flood event of some kind. The creation of man from the ground comes from the observation that our bodies are made up of the same stuff as dirt and when we die our body return to the stuff of dirt. That is just fact. The God part of it is that God did it. That is what makes it a sacred story.
Kos: ‘No one ever said “last time it filled the whole earth” or that it “covered the tops of the mountains.”
You might if you lived in the middle of Mesopotamia. From Babylon, no mountains can be seen. Only hills.
You are reading this story, if you are reading at all, as we understand the world today. The “world” is the whole globe. They knew nothing about a globe. For them the word meant the land. And because the people who experienced the flood lived in Mesopotamia the earth / land was Mesopotamia.
The flood did not cover the entire globe. But it covered the land where these people lived and deep enough to cover the hills they could see from their front door.
Kos: “You think it speaks Truths™ better than any other big book of fairy tales.”
I am a literature guy. I think that many if not most stories speak truth. I think many stories are told with that intention. Even those that are not speak the truth of the author. I evaluate most of the stories I read and the films I watch on that basis. I do not think that many are written just for entertainment.
So, I take the biblical stories seriously. What matters is the Truth they speak. Does it resonate with me? Does it reveal something about life that is important? Is there something I can learn from the story? If there is, maybe I should take it to heart.
Now, I assume by what you’ve written that literature or movies are just for fun. I think you are missing something, but I am a literature guy as I said. Even a “Thriller” is based on some fundamental truth the author wants to picture. It may be as simple as the bad guys don’t win in the end. But that is a truth. It may be that life is pointless. That is a truth. It may be that the strong survive and the meek do not. That too is a truth. But is it?
The question is which truth do you think true? Which do you live by and why? Has the author persuaded you? For me the truths I find in the Bible resonate. And they seem to be universal themes. That means most people relate to them. Maybe you are the exception, I don’t know. But, for exasmple, most people relate to the truth that we are dust. And most people relate to the truth that we are more than dust, which is the companion piece in the sacred story. We are made in the image of God. Most people find that makes sense somehow because they feel it. And most people find hope to live by in that.
And that is the problem with the myth of what I detect is your worldview. (All worldviews are beliefs or myths about what is true.) In the end, the truth is life is absurd. And for many people who live that worldview, it does not make them good. It does not make them deep down satisfied. I hope you are different, but if so, I wonder why?
LikeLike
In future, Don, you will need to use a name for your comments; your own or your wife’s or even a made up one. Anything but Anonymous. I get a few of these and I don’t know who I’m dealing with, whether they’re commenters who have an existing thread of comments, whether they’re new or whether indeed they’re human. I suspect some are not and I’m not going to waste my time arguing with AI. Please indicate it’s you.
Over to you now, Kos.
LikeLike
(Once again Neil, I apologize for the length. I need to take my verbosity limiter in for a tuneup.)
Hey Don! Lookit you, out of your bubble! And delusional as ever! Don’t ever change.
Don sed: The stories in the Bible are not news stories. … The stories in the Bible also are not myths…
Okay. So what ARE they?
Don sed: You can find myths in the ancient Sumerian literature.
But the stories in the Bible are not myths. So when the Sumerian god Enki crafts humans from clay and gives them life, that’s a myth. But when a Bible author reimagines the story with Yahweh crafting a human from clay and giving it life that’s no longer a myth? It’s something else that you don’t have a name for? Out here in the real world we call that special pleading. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading )
Don sed: One of my most interesting projects has been to examine the primeval oral traditions of Genesis 2-11 from the point of view of culture and literature.
So you looked intensely into the culture and literature of the ancient Canaanites and neighboring peoples, right? You can regale us with stories of Canaanite gods, heroes, and monsters. You can detail how they are similar to, yet differ from, those of Sumeria, Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt. These are, after all, the cultures and literature that the Hebrews grew out of. You can’t understand Hebrew stories without understanding these others.
No. Of course not. By traditions, culture and literature you mean only those of the Bible and only then interpreted through a 19th/20th century American Protestant Christian lens. You aren’t going to learn what historians and anthropologists have to say. You’re going to interpret the Bible using only YOUR interpretation of the Bible. Circular reasoning. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning )
Don sed: The earliest of those stories is probably the oldest story in the world and dates to around 12,000 years ago.
You’re not going to identify that story for us, are you Don? No. That would give us a way to fact check you. No. Safer for your world view if you leave that info out.
I’m guessing it’s the Flood myth (sorry, the Flood definitely-not-a-myth), as you’ve previously dated that to 12,000 ya.
If so, that’s interesting. You’re saying the Flood (let’s go with) story is older than the creation stories. Older than Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel.
So you date The Flood™ to 12,000 ya while most Jewish/Christian theologians place it about 4,500 ya (~ 2,500 BCE). Do you have any evidence for your date? A source that agrees with you (other than pseudo-archeologists claiming Noah escaped from the destruction of Atlantis at the end of the Younger Dryas)?
Don sed: It is told in the form and style of an oral tradition and has the marks of that genre. It is not a news story. It is not even a historical narrative as we think of that genre. It is a sacred story and an allegory mixed with real details that were probably added by the editor when it was transcribed 8,000 years later. (emphasis added)
There are at least three precursors to the Genesis Flood allegory-mixed-with-real-details: the Sumerian Flood Story, Atrahasis, and Gilgamesh. As stories do, the story evolves and is adapted with each retelling. Don has said in previous discussions that while these three version predate the Genesis version, it is the Genesis version that is the True™ telling.
To recap Don’s current comment: The Flood story floated around for 8,000 years (approximately 320 human generations) as oral retellings before finally being written down. Placing the first written version at about 2,000 BCE.
Our earliest fragments of the story actually date to 400 years later in 1,600 BCE. While writing in Sumeria dates to 3,400 BCE. So they waited 1,800 after inventing writing to actually write down their 8,000 year old flood story. AND THEY GOT IT WRONG!
It would be another 1,400 to 1,700 years before a Hebrew scribe would come along to add the “real details” that would finally get the story right.
This is Pure AAA Grade Donovian Bullshit.
Every historian knows that the closer you can get to an original text, the closer you get to what the original said. Every detective knows the sooner you can get an eyewitness testimony, the more accurate it will be. Every minute that goes by gives the witness time to re-think what happened. Perhaps to re-imagine it or second guess it or corroborate their version with someone else’s.
Memory studies show that our memories change over time. We think we relate stories from our childhood the same way every time. But when people go back to written accounts they find changes – often significant – to the way they “remember” it happening. More studies show that memories can be altered, even implanted, by others using simple suggestion.
And there is no way to verify how much and in what way an oral tradition has changed over time. None!
So we have 8,000 of strictly oral tradition followed by 1,400 years of wildly differing written accounts BEFORE an unknown scribe comes along and MAGICALLY produces “real details” that finally tell the original story correctly.
Delusional Don is well named indeed!
Don sed: It should be read as a literary piece based on a real event that happened in time and place about the time of Gobekli tepe, in fact, and in approx the same location.
Wow. Just wow. Be it remembered that Göbekli Tepe predates writing by thousands of years. There is no way to even suggest a connection to Noah’s Flood. This is pulled directly from Don’s ass.
Don sed: When we do, we find itr is remarkable and amazing. And the truth…
Sure Don. If you imagine a completely unevidenced, counterintuitive, and counterfactual story, you’ll find that story to be remarkable and amazing and true!
But I’m willing, even eager, to be proven wrong. Produce some evidence, Don. Show us the evidence! (And no. Your pondering long and hard about your favorite story book and how it might fit into the real world is NOT evidence.)
Anyway, Don, thanks for this little excursion back into the strange little world you inhabit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m thankful you’re willing to take on Don, Kos. I feel we go round in circles with the arguments he makes. I’m sure we’ve discussed before what is myth, how we know it’s myth/not myth; what is metaphor, how we know what’s metaphor and what’s not. Likewise he shifts his ground on the genres we’re dealing with within the Bible.
He fails Textual Analysis 101 when he doesn’t, can’t or won’t define his terms: it’s news reporting, it’s not news reporting, it’s history, it’s not history, etc, etc. When we call him out on this, he deflects or insinuates that we’re too dim to understand what he’s saying and even dimmer for not working everything out for ourselves. I despair.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“So what ARE they?”
They are sacred stories. See my reply to Neil. ” So when the Sumerian god Enki crafts humans from clay and gives them life, that’s a myth.”
No, it is a metaphor or allegory. The reality is that we are made of the stuff of the earth.
“So you looked intensely into the culture and literature of the ancient Canaanites and neighboring peoples, right? ”
No. The Eden story comes from far earlier than the Canaanites. I looked into the people of that time via the archaeological finds of the Tas Tepeler civilization and Gobekli tepe. That was 12,000 years ago. I looked into the climate, the geography, the ecosystem, and the religions. I looked at the science.
“You aren’t going to learn what historians and anthropologists have to say.”
I almost exclusively used what archaeologists and anthropologists and climate scientists. et al. have to say. And I reexamined the biblical story of Eden as a student of ancient literature says.
“You’re not going to identify that story for us, are you Don?”
You have the story.
I have looked at it for the characteristics of oral tradition. There are many that are virtually universal in oral traditions. I noted places where the later editor added comments. (Those too can be dated by reference to the literary and historical references by the means of source criticism and literary criticism.)
“Flood definitely-not-a-myth), as you’ve previously dated that to 12,000 ya.”
If I dated it to 12,000 years ago I mistakenly did so. I believe it dates to about 8,000 ya. It correlates with the migration of the people of the Tas Tepeler civilization from the hills onto the plain of the Euphrates.
It correlates with their new technology of making vessels out of clay and making clay bricks, and to their increasing use of early domesticated grain.
“Do you have any evidence for your date?”
I think so. It is the period of no archaeological evidence for populations of people on the steppes of the upper Mesopotamian about 8,000 ya (The Tepeler people) to the earliest archaeological evidence found under the ruins of Eridu in southern Mesopotamia of buildings made of unfired bricks.
Eridu dates to about 6,000 to 7,000 ya, so the lower ruins had to be earlier. Eridu is made of fired brick. That is a 1,000 to 2,000 year gap. The question is why?
The answer is a flood. In a flood unfired bricks melt. There was a civilization there, but the evidence washed away.
“Memory studies show that our memories change over time.”
Memories change. Everyone knows that. The ancients knew that. People today in oral cultures know that. That is why every oral culture developed a means of keeping stories relatively intact over many years and many retellings. Briefly, it is the story style. Because of the structure, it is kept without memorization. I’ll bet you can remember stories that were read to you as a child, even though you made no attempt to remember them.
Add to that ritual retelling.
We know of stories that have been kept pretty well intact through as many as 14,000 years by that means. The Indians of the Pacific Northwest can still tell them. They relate to a cataclysmic event of floods (not the flood of Mesopotamia) at the end of the ice age, which geologists now know did in fact happen. So, once you apply science and our new understanding of prehistory to the biblical primeval stories, they appear a great deal more like history than myth.
LikeLike
I’m not going to comment much on any of this. Basically, you’re taking some cultures we know little about and sticking your favorite sacred myths into them. You assert your myths were there xxxx years ago. Something you can’t prove because they hadn’t invented writing yet.
It feels right to you. And since your myths are the most special myths they MUST have been there. Or so you imagine. I’m not interested in your imaginings, Don. Not in the slightest.
LikeLike
Kos: “Basically, you’re taking some cultures we know little about and sticking your favorite sacred myths into them.”
I may know more than you think, but it does not take a rocket scientist to see the similarities in what we do know about ancient cultures.
Kos: “You assert your myths were there xxxx years ago. Something you can’t prove because they hadn’t invented writing yet.”
You make the mistake of thinking that nothing existed before what you recognize as writing. The fact is that people have been writing for far longer than you think. The cave art from 20,000 years ago is writing of a sort, just not using the characters you are acquainted with. But it is saying something.
The stone monuments and animals as well as human figures carved in stone at Gobekli tepe is writing. It is saying something.
But there is also oral tradition. There are oral cultures today, and we learn from them that what they want to remember they make into easily remembered and passed on oral stories. Some of those about the floods in the Pacific Northwest have endured for 14,000 years. How do we know they endured that long? Because geologists have looked at the land and concluded that indeed there were huge floods. In other words, the oral stories were grounded in reality.
I think that the primeval sacred stories of Genesis are oral stories from almost as far back. And I think they are grounded in reality which archaeologists, geologists, climate scientists, and historians of ancient civilizations can identify. You may think the God part is made up, but the time and place is not.
LikeLike
You think they’re primeval. That doesn’t mean they are, despite the special pleading that follows.
There were localised floods. Okay, but I don’t think anyone is disputing that. There have always been localised floods. What is in dispute is the whole Noah scenario. There was no old guy who built an ark to God’s specification and saved animals of every kind while all other living creatures outside his family drowned.
It’s made up, Don. Myth in the sense everyone understands but which you avoid because it doesn’t suit you. There is no archaeological, geological or genetic evidence for any of the Noah/Ark story (that’s one way we know it’s myth.)
You’re deflecting and diverting, wittering on about localised floods that were possibly remembered in oral traditions, all of which are long gone. You have no evidence for any of this conjecture.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kos sed: Or so you imagine. I’m not interested in your imaginings, Don. Not in the slightest.
Anonymous Don Continued to pull imaginings from his ass. No sources beyond his ass.
Anonymous Don seems to think the problem with pulling things from his ass isn’t that it’s shit, it’s that we haven’t had enough of it. *sigh*
It’s a long weekend. We commemorate that one time the omniscient, omnipotent god of the Universe was slightly inconvenienced for a weekend. We honor a supposed Jewish messiah by having a ham dinner. Which, I believe, perfectly sums up Christianity’s relationship to the culture that gave birth to it. I hope everyone has a good one.
LikeLike
The problem with allegory and metaphor and simile and the like is that they all depend on interpretation. The further we get from the original language and culture, the less likely we are to actually understand the original meaning. We have not only the death of the author, but of his language and his culture.
Don, of course, is very fortunate to have stumbled on the One True Interpretation™ of his Very Sacred Myth®.
I too was blessed to be born into a family that had the One True Interpretation™ of that self same myth. But our understanding was VERY different.
And any appeal to the Super Sacred Text™ is futile, because Don will say I’m interpreting everything wrong, while he is right.
But maybe Paul got his interpretation wrong. And all the Christians after him were led astray. Maybe Mohammed was the one to finally understand the Sacred Stories and what they REALLY mean. Or, Joseph Smith? Or L. Ron Hubbard who gave us all new myths so we wouldn’t be led astray any longer?
And we’ve seen the Holy Spirit is a useless guide as she will testify to any of the above, and more. She tell anyone what they want to hear.
So, Don has his special book and he understands it while we don’t. He’s just that fucking special. Well done, Don!
LikeLike
You lay out a pretty good explanation of how stories work. But as a literature guy, like myself, you know that stories can be more true than mere facts. They can be penetratingly true, as are these stories in the Bible and particularly the stories told by Jesus are for millions of people. Why is that less significant than the spare newspaper account of an event?
You know also that many stories can be factually true and significantly true as well. For example, many careful historians accept as factual the life and death by crucifixion of a first century Galilean who was maybe also a peripatetic preacher or rabbi whom we know as Jesus. Given that basic fact, why would you then attribute the parable stories he is reputed to have told to someone else?
You see where I am going. Where do you draw the line between factual and creative literature? But more significantly, why dismiss the parables as not authentically Jesus’ teaching? What criteria do you use?
You have a problem. It is the old camel’s nose in the tent dilemma. If you let one fact in as fact, where do you stop.? For my part, I don’t stop. Why? Because the whole gospel narrative is too coherent and coherent on too many levels to stop.
The gospel narrative is also has far more complexity and a verisimilitude that fiction at that stage of literary development did not have. It reads like a modern story not a first century story. And it has far mor nuances of personality than first century fiction. That’s a puzzle, don’t you think?
Has it been stylized? Sure. It is styled as an announcement – that is what “gospel” means. It is edited to achieve that purpose. The several Gospels are also written for particular audiences. And they seem to have used sources that were slightly different. The authors also seem to speak with individual voices. All those observations and more point to something more than a rousing story to entertain the masses.
How do you deal with all that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The problem is not that non-Christians can’t see the Bible stories as literature. It’s that Christians insist that it’s something more. Christians insist that unless we believe their stories – in the right way – we will be burned and tortured for eternity. And Christians, of course, can’t agree on what the “right way” is. But they know if we heathens don’t do it, we’ll burn, baby, burn.
Reducing the discussion to literary genres neatly sidesteps that little fact. If Christians were saying their story book has some good life lessons to live by, no one would care beyond that.
We are currently watching a war pushed by those in the U.S. government that think they can force the events in Revelation to happen if they just kill enough non-Christians.
But here you argue that it’s just a story. You stupid atheists know what a story is, don’t you?!?
Don sed: The stories in the Bible also are not myths… You can find myths in the ancient Sumerian literature.
But he never goes on to tell us why. And more importantly how. How is he telling myth from this not myth category he fails to name?
The answer is obvious as is his reason for failing to define it. He believes all the myths in the world are myths EXCEPT those about his god. The stories about his god aren’t myths. They are some other unnamed thing. He avoid this fact because he knows he has no actual way to tell the myths from the non-myths besides special pleading. “My myths aren’t myths, but yours are!” screams Don into the void.
You and he reduce your sacred text to literature because you know you can’t show it to be anything else. And here I agree with you. Don’s god is exactly the same as all the other gods that humans have told stories about – a literary device used to make some point or other.
LikeLike
its the dome of rock they going to eliminate
with the cost of millions if not billions lives
LikeLike
” Christians insist that unless we believe their stories – in the right way – we will be burned and tortured for eternity. “
That is crazy and probably the result of childhood experiences that are not normal.
No one ever told me that I had to believe the flood story or the Eden story or I would go to hell. I do not know of anyone who had that experience.
We are told that we must receive the mercy of God demonstrated for us at the cross to enjoy God’s promise of life eternal. To not do so, knowing of his mercy, is a rejection of God, the forgiveness and mercy he extends, and the promises he made to us. It is that which results eventually in eternal separation from God which is hell.
That is so common in our experience of life that can’t explain why you don’t understand. If I had a $100 bill in my hand and held it out to you saying it is your if you came and take it, and you did not, what is the result? You don’t have the $100 you could have had.
God says, everyone who is thirsty, come. You who have no money, come, take of the water of life I offer you at no cost. (Isa. 55 paraphrased) That has always been God’s offer. Life. But as Isaiah himself noted, the Israelites did not listen. They did not come and take the water of life offered. The offer remains, however, and is made to us. It is repeated in the very last chapter of the last book in the Bible: ” the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say: “Come!” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wants it take the water of life free of charge.”
LikeLike
Anonymous Don sed: No one ever told me that I had to believe the flood story or the Eden story or I would go to hell. I do not know of anyone who had that experience.
Hey there, Anonymous Don. My name’s Kos and I was raised to believe that believing anything in the Bible was allegorical or metaphorical was to deny the perfect word of God. Such people are not True™ Christians and would not be counted as Christ’s at the judgement.
So, maybe you know one such person. Even if only electronically. See also: Answers in Genesis (Creation Ministries International).
It must be a great comfort to you, Don, that you found the One True Interpretation of Christianity® and aren’t even aware of all the other One True Interpretations of Christianity that are out there.
Anonymous Don sed: If I had a $100 bill in my hand and held it out to you saying it is your if you came and take it, and you did not, what is the result? You don’t have the $100 you could have had.
The problem with your allegory is that no one who’s ever offered me $100 actually had a $100 bill in their hand. Or, to use the more popular one: I’ve had many come banging on the door telling me the house was on fire, but it never was. The people who see the fire (or the $100 bill) have all been worked up about something they can’t demonstrate to be real.
All I’ve ever asked for is some actual evidence. And all you’ve ever offered is more stories, more allegories, more unsubstantiated bullshit.
LikeLike
It continues to amaze me that folks continue to take the bible stories as FACT. Certainly the book is full of ways and means to live in harmony with others … and it provides many examples on how to do this. But to continue to declare that it is all about some “God-Man” (and all that goes with that description) is simply mind-boggling. IMO, it’s rather sad that so many need the stories in a several thousand year old book to enable them to live their lives.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, you have one part right. It has enabled men around the world and through history to live their lives well and significantly. The principles, of course, work for anyone. But the problem is that few do.
I think every one of us can look around and see a culture in crisis. Here we have people who dismiss or even hate others because of the color of their skin. The ideal is what Martin Luther King Jr. described and hoped for in his famous speech. But I have been to Georgia, and it ain’t so there. It ain’t so here in the North. We know what works, but we don’t do it.
Former President Jimmy Carter saw that as wrong. He got that out of the several thousand-year-old book. He saw it practiced in the life of Jesus. He follow what he saw. It cost him. He left the church in Plains, GA, where had been a member because of their resistance of that. Calling yourself a Christian doesn’t make it so, but Jesus said as much. What makes you a Christian is following Jesus.
I have to go on a bit. I have a friend in Pakistan. She is a follower of Jesus. She saw the children of the brickyards who were essentially economic slaves. They would never be free. But she created a school where they did not need to pay for uniforms or books. The education was free. She provided transportation and meals. She brought help when the floods last year came and swamped their homes. I was blessed to be able to help. The government did not. The United Sates did not help as it had in the past. Did you help? Maybe you did not know.
Isn’t that the right thing to do? Yes. Of course it is.
She learned it from the 2000-year-old book and Jesus. And she followed Jesus. It turns out that there are many like her in Pakistan. All followers of Jesus. I am proud to have her as a friend because she will change her world.
It works, the principle of loving your neighbor. I am sad that so many do not see that and follow.
Many choose a philosophy of existentialism that says life is absurd and nothing makes real sense. You must choose and take a leap without knowing it you have chosen right or if there is a right. Many decide to please themselves in this meaningless life. They chose to fish and hunt for big game. They choose to pursue attractive women. Like Ernest Hemmingway. Or money and power like Donald Trump. But what is the end of all that. I do not have to tell you. But getting there damages a whole lot of people. I don’t want to do that. I have chosen to follow Jesus.
LikeLike
Thank you for your input. I’m well aware that many believe following Jesus is the best way to live one’s life. And perhaps it is. But when push comes to shove, many of those who claim to follow Jesus clearly demonstrate just the opposite.
Also, many non-Christian people do things that benefit others. One does not need to believe in Jesus to be a person who loves and helps others.
Thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts.
LikeLike