If the Bible is not literally/historically "true", then why is it special?

[TLK Valentine]

POST #33: "there were no witnesses inside the empty tomb itself, and there is no description of exactly what went on inside in the Gospels"

Read closer. Peter + John went inside and saw the burial wraps and shroud. They were separated and folded. If someone stole the body, they would have taken the entire "mummified" Jesus.

Mark 15:46
Joseph bought a linen cloth, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen cloth (mummified) and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.

Ignoring Hollywood for a moment, there's more to mummification than simply wrapping someone in a cloth... it's actually a very involved process, which Jesus would not have undergone.

Burial cloths are actually pretty simple to apply... and to remove... Consider the Shroud of Turin (which I personally consider to be a fake, but a well-done one... but I digress)

It's therefore entirely plausible that someone who wanted the body would, if they wanted to make it look like a resurrection (the most likely motive for stealing Jesus' body), either unwrap it and leave the cloth behind, or leave fake cloths as a decoy.

 

[dcalling]

This is primarily directed at non-literalists.

I was listening to an online sermon on Noah's flood. The pastor avoided talking about the historicity of the flood (likely to avoid conflict among his congregation). The resulting sermon was essentially an interpretation and application of the story to our lives using a narrative in which the historical truth or falsity of the narrative was irrelevant.

I found myself thinking, "You know, the pastor could be preaching on any myth or work of fiction and still draw similar interpretations, applications, moral insights, philosophical insights, and other tips which are helpful for our lives."

I felt like I was back in a high school English class where we were discussing and interpreting Greek myths or How To Kill A Mockingbird. You can find lots of great life lessons, moral insights and other tips in many works of fiction or pseudo-fiction.

For example, a pastor could use the story of Noah to emphasize the virtue of faith. He could also use Harry Potter's relationship with Dumbledore to emphasize the virtue of faith. The message could be the same. The historical truth of the narrative is irrelevant.

So, for Biblical non-literalists, what makes the Bible special? Similar life lessons and messages can be found in other fictional or pseudo-fictional narratives and stories.

If a pastor took a non-Biblical work of fiction and used it to drive home a "biblical truth" would that be acceptable?

This is especially more pertinent because certain aspects of the Bible contain morally unsavoury parts (i.e. God-sanctioned mass-murder and rape in Num 31:16-18) whereas certain works of fiction contain really important moral lessons (i.e. How To Kill A Mockingbird on racism).

I wonder why the pastor doing that, he should have hold the Bible as true. Some people will tell you that there is no way the flood could happen, yet ignore the facts that the fossiles of big fishes can be found on high mountains.

 

[Petros2015]

POST #33: "there were no witnesses inside the empty tomb itself, and there is no description of exactly what went on inside in the Gospels"

There were no witness inside the tomb after the stone was rolled in front of it. No one saw him get up is what I meant. The next time anyone human is there inside, the tomb is empty and the stone is rolled away.

Mark 16:5
Entering the tomb, they (women) saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe (ANGEL?); and they were amazed.

And if you read Matthew, they see an angel like lightning when they get to the tomb, there is an earthquake and he sits on the stone he just rolled away after the guards (that I don't think are present in any of the other gospels) pass out from fear.

Matthew 28:2-4

If you read Luke, there are 2 angels inside instead of 1.

Luke 24:4-5

If you read John, only Mary Magdalene goes at first then followed by Peter and John

John 20:1-3

Matthew is a lot flashier, with earthquakes and the dead rising at the time of death on the cross though all except John have a darkness falling at the time of death. I read all 4 crucifixion and resurrection accounts yesterday looking for the similarities and differences between the accounts. There were actually more similarities than I remembered, but there are also differences. I'm OK with that as I stated in the beginning of the thread. I'm not a Literalist, I'm a Personalist. The Bible is personal, to me and I believe inspired by my Creator. It may not be a literally historically accurate account from a human perspective, and it may have conflicts but for me it is sufficient to look further in prayer and counsel. It is where my faith is rooted.

It's a murder mystery. But instead of "who dun it?" the question is, "just who did we kill? And why?"

And, more interesting, what was the response?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

This is primarily directed at non-literalists.

I was listening to an online sermon on Noah's flood. The pastor avoided talking about the historicity of the flood (likely to avoid conflict among his congregation). The resulting sermon was essentially an interpretation and application of the story to our lives using a narrative in which the historical truth or falsity of the narrative was irrelevant.

I found myself thinking, "You know, the pastor could be preaching on any myth or work of fiction and still draw similar interpretations, applications, moral insights, philosophical insights, and other tips which are helpful for our lives."

I felt like I was back in a high school English class where we were discussing and interpreting Greek myths or How To Kill A Mockingbird. You can find lots of great life lessons, moral insights and other tips in many works of fiction or pseudo-fiction.

For example, a pastor could use the story of Noah to emphasize the virtue of faith. He could also use Harry Potter's relationship with Dumbledore to emphasize the virtue of faith. The message could be the same. The historical truth of the narrative is irrelevant.

So, for Biblical non-literalists, what makes the Bible special? Similar life lessons and messages can be found in other fictional or pseudo-fictional narratives and stories.

If a pastor took a non-Biblical work of fiction and used it to drive home a "biblical truth" would that be acceptable?

This is especially more pertinent because certain aspects of the Bible contain morally unsavoury parts (i.e. God-sanctioned mass-murder and rape in Num 31:16-18) whereas certain works of fiction contain really important moral lessons (i.e. How To Kill A Mockingbird on racism).

Personally, the Bible is 'special' to me because it gives me metaphysical insights as a byproduct of the phenomenon of revelation. These insights I wouldn't have on my own and wouldn't be something I could get by picking up and reading Mother Goose, for instance---which is why the Bible is 'revelatory' even though it's writings are typically representational (history), metaphorical (parables and wisdom) and/or symbolic (prophecy).

For people who don't like representational, metaphorical or symbolic writing, I suppose the Bible won't have much meaning or much to say to those individuals ...

2PhiloVoid

 

[devolved]

If the Bible is not literally/historically "true", then why is it special?

....

Because it helps people organize around central belief about certain political ideology, pool their resources and manage communities... just like any other religious book does out there.

 

[Uber Genius]

This is primarily directed at non-literalists.

I was listening to an online sermon on Noah's flood. The pastor avoided talking about the historicity of the flood (likely to avoid conflict among his congregation). The resulting sermon was essentially an interpretation and application of the story to our lives using a narrative in which the historical truth or falsity of the narrative was irrelevant.

I found myself thinking, "You know, the pastor could be preaching on any myth or work of fiction and still draw similar interpretations, applications, moral insights, philosophical insights, and other tips which are helpful for our lives."

I felt like I was back in a high school English class where we were discussing and interpreting Greek myths or How To Kill A Mockingbird. You can find lots of great life lessons, moral insights and other tips in many works of fiction or pseudo-fiction.

For example, a pastor could use the story of Noah to emphasize the virtue of faith. He could also use Harry Potter's relationship with Dumbledore to emphasize the virtue of faith. The message could be the same. The historical truth of the narrative is irrelevant.

So, for Biblical non-literalists, what makes the Bible special? Similar life lessons and messages can be found in other fictional or pseudo-fictional narratives and stories.

If a pastor took a non-Biblical work of fiction and used it to drive home a "biblical truth" would that be acceptable?

This is especially more pertinent because certain aspects of the Bible contain morally unsavoury parts (i.e. God-sanctioned mass-murder and rape in Num 31:16-18) whereas certain works of fiction contain really important moral lessons (i.e. How To Kill A Mockingbird on racism).

First off, good question.

Secondly, for those in the Christian community who care to get at the original meaning of the scriptures there is a process called exegesis (I will let you look up that process).

What is special about the Bible is its God's perspective on questions like where we came from, where we are going when we die, how do we live our lives, how do we get meaning in life, and finally how do we relate to God?

Those answers and more are told by over 40 authors spanning half a dozen cultures over 1500 years. They wrote similarly to their contemporaries. Some were fictional, some literal, some embellished details to impress their enemies.