Biblical discernment

[durangodawood]

How do Christians discern which parts of scripture are to be understood as myth (fictions with teaching/revelatory value) and which parts literally happened?
.

 

[talitha]

Usually when I read the Bible it seems pretty obvious. It says things like "On the Lord&#8217;s Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet...." or "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a draw-net cast into the sea...." <<simile, not literal language...

 

[drich0150]

How do Christians discern which parts of scripture are to be understood as myth (fictions with teaching/revelatory value) and which parts literally happened?
.

Not sure I understand the question.
There are some parts that are labeled as dreams, visions, prophecies, proverbs(wise sayings), Psalms(Songs and Hymns), parables(Stories with a meaning) and Revelations(A vision or understanding.) There is nothing to my knowledge to be taken as a myth or fiction.

Do you have an example?

 

[durangodawood]

Usually when I read the Bible it seems pretty obvious. It says things like "On the Lord’s Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet...." or "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a draw-net cast into the sea...." <<simile, not literal language...

Well, I'm not really wondering about obvious metaphor. I mean everyone knows the Kingdom of Heaven isnt an actual fishing apparatus. I'm wondering about the big stories: Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, etc.
.

 

[durangodawood]

Not sure I understand the question.
There are some parts that are labeled as dreams, visions, prophecies, proverbs(wise sayings), Psalms(Songs and Hymns), parables(Stories with a meaning) and Revelations(A vision or understanding.) There is nothing to my knowledge to be taken as a myth or fiction.

Do you have an example?

Sure. Examples would include: Noah and flood. The creation story.
.

 

[talitha]

Well, since historical people's genealogies are traced back to Adam (Jesus, David), I would say he was a literal person. Same with Noah. Jesus referred to Noah as a real person, saying, "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away."

 

[durangodawood]

Well, since historical people's genealogies are traced back to Adam (Jesus, David), I would say he was a literal person. Same with Noah. Jesus referred to Noah as a real person, saying, "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away."

Hmm. I guess the telling of the generations poses a real obstacle to any Christian who finds the flood and creation to feel intuitively mythical.
.
But, plenty of Christians DO manage to read them as myths. I wonder how they deal with the genealogy....?
.

 

[drich0150]

Sure. Examples would include: Noah and flood. The creation story.
.

Typically, people/believers attribute stories that seem to go against conventional wisdom as myth or fable only when they try and reconcile popular wisdom with a biblical understanding of the event.

This is not what Christianity as a whole does. I would say only a small portion of believers do this. How they make this discernment depends on what they are willing to argue.

 

[ephraimanesti]

Hmm. I guess the telling of the generations poses a real obstacle to any Christian who finds the flood and creation to feel intuitively mythical.
.
But, plenty of Christians DO manage to read them as myths. I wonder how they deal with the genealogy....?
.

MY FRIEND,

People tend to conveniently "overlook" parts of Scripture which they have trouble accepting or dealing with--for example, members of the Westboro Baptist Church choosing to ignore the fact that "God is Love" (I John 4:8) or abortionists ignoring the Scriptural injunction "Thou shalt not commit murder." (Exodus 20:13)

ABBA'S FOOL,
ephraim

 

[oi_antz]

How do Christians discern which parts of scripture are to be understood as myth (fictions with teaching/revelatory value) and which parts literally happened?
.

If the bible says something is true but you read it as "myth" are you saying that the bible is not true? Do some Christians actually believe that the bible is not true? Isn't that cherry picking?

 

[durangodawood]

If the bible says something is true but you read it as "myth" are you saying that the bible is not true? Do some Christians actually believe that the bible is not true? Isn't that cherry picking?

Its sort of the wrong question to ask whether a myth is "true or false". The right question is: what is the deep lesson here.
.
If a Bible story is indeed myth, but you read it as literally true, then you are the one imposing your own beliefs on the Bible.
.

 

[razeontherock]

Well, I'm not really wondering about obvious metaphor. I mean everyone knows the Kingdom of Heaven isnt an actual fishing apparatus. I'm wondering about the big stories: Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, etc.
.

I find these really "open up" when you approach them as metaphor, or "myth with moral." Is there any value to debating with yourself if they are historical or not? Instead, consider how many things occurred that were NOT recorded in Scripture, and consider why these particular things were. Why were certain people mentioned at all? What is so unusual about them?

I find it is at this level that "the Spirit speaks."

 

[durangodawood]

Well, I'm not really wondering about obvious metaphor. I mean everyone knows the Kingdom of Heaven isnt an actual fishing apparatus. I'm wondering about the big stories: Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, etc.
.

I take it back. The Kingdom of Heaven IS the big story.
.
But I still wonder about how Christians discern myth from history.... or if it even matters (as Raze suggests it might not, if I'm reading you right).
.

 

[razeontherock]

If a Bible story is indeed myth, but you read it as literally true, then you are the one imposing your own beliefs on the Bible.
.

OTOH if a particular story is true and you read it as myth, what is lost? Faith that is alive is something that grows ...

 

[razeontherock]

.
But I still wonder about how Christians discern myth from history.... or if it even matters (as Raze suggests it might not, if I'm reading you right).
.

Does it matter? Maybe, at some point, to some. The big point is seeking first His Kingdom! Then "all these things" will be added unto you ... hmmm, is there any application here?

 

[durangodawood]

OTOH if a particular story is true and you read it as myth, what is lost? Faith that is alive is something that grows ...

Possibly everything... Some Christians maintain that for the death and resurrection of Jesus to be known as historical, ALL the other tales back to genesis must be known as historical. If you have to exercise your judgement in some cases, then you open up the whole text to judgement.
.

 

[rubicontwentytwelve]

How do Christians discern which parts of scripture are to be understood as myth (fictions with teaching/revelatory value) and which parts literally happened?
.

None is myth. But I understand your question....

The best I can say is that the bible defines itself....IF one permits it to do so. Almost ALL of the prophecies/depictions have dual definitions/fullfilments. In the case of prophecies; there is an ancient and a latter fulfillment. In the case of the depictions, such as David vs Goliath, there is both a worldly (material world meanings) as well as a Spiritual definition. Most understand the material meanings, but only certain understand the Spiritual definitions.

Also, the books of the Bible repeat, but in /from different view points. Like mathew, Mark, luke, and John. Each of the other books does the same; each reinforcing, adding, and building upon that which the previous book taught.

For instance... MOST think that only Adam and Eve had the choice of following God or following Satan....determining the course of history for future generations. Yet that is not what is taught...man has had repeated opportunities to set his world parallel to the way of God, he just never recognized them nor took them.

As for the symbolism,...again, that is defined through study/desire for truth....ALL the definitions are there...one simply has to seek them.

There are no myths in the Bible, except the ones man has put there. Get yourself a Concordence, an older KJV with center column or side margin references, and an Interlinear or Hewbrew, Greek, English Bible withe the words numbered and coresponding to Strong's. A good Bible eycyclopedia and a couple of Commentaries don't hurt either.

....oh, .... and don't forget to ask for understanding from God, ...without that and the proper attitude you'll just be chasing your tale or someone else's.

 

[oi_antz]

Its sort of the wrong question to ask whether a myth is "true or false". The right question is: what is the deep lesson here.
.
If a Bible story is indeed myth, but you read it as literally true, then you are the one imposing your own beliefs on the Bible.
.

I believe that God doesn't lie, and since the bible is the story of God and man, then anything that is stated that is not actually true means that someone is lying about God and therefore the text is unreliable. However, there is definitely a lot more to learn by thinking in a "mythical" sense of the story, but in order to do so you still have to entertain the concept that the story is true - even if it exists only in "imaginationland". IOW, to add or subtract from what is stated undermines faith, regardless if the story is read literally or mythologically.

Besides, if it wasn't meant to be believed literally, why would so much effort be spent establishing reliable blood lines through Jesus, David, Noah, right back to Adam?

 

[razeontherock]

Excellent answer, Rubicon

(I do agree with what Durango seemed to assert, that the Resurrection of Christ is "Holy ground," not to be trifled with)

 

[durangodawood]

I believe that God doesn't lie, and since the bible is the story of God and man, then anything that is stated that is not actually true means that someone is lying about God and therefore the text is unreliable. However, there is definitely a lot more to learn by thinking in a "mythical" sense of the story, but in order to do so you still have to entertain the concept that the story is true - even if it exists only in "imaginationland". IOW, to add or subtract from what is stated undermines faith, regardless if the story is read literally or mythologically.

Besides, if it wasn't meant to be believed literally, why would so much effort be spent establishing reliable blood lines through Jesus, David, Noah, right back to Adam?

But a myth is not a lie. Its essentially a fiction. I certainly dont consider the Navajo creation myth to be a "lie". No one would claim that. Nor for the other myriad creation tales from around the world.
.
(And to elevate just one of the world's many creation myths to historical fact just seems completely absurd to me. There's no way that can be the price of admission to understanding Jesus.)
.