Christians? Why shouldn't the stories in the Bible be considered Myth?

Question

If the stories in the Bible should be considered a report of actual and true events should not the stories in the holy texts of other religions also be considered reports of actual and true events? if not ... why not? why would the Bible be more valid as a historical document then say ... the Vedas? remember please, that some of the people mentioned in the Gita have historical relevance outside the holy text and many of the places mentioned in the Gita still exist.

Answer 1

I'm a Christian, and many Biblical stories are, indeed, classified as mythology. There are flood and creation myths from many different cultures, and some of those myths are recorded in the Bible. The Bible is not meant to be taken as a history or science textbook. The term "mythology" is not, in an academic sense, a denigration of any of these stories. I've read the Gita, and I do respect those stories (and any culture's stories). They are all valuable.

Answer 2

To give you some perspective, the History of Herodotus is not considered a myth even though it contains actions of the gods, mythical beasts, etc. The reason it isn't is because such elements are secondary to the main role of the text.



Likewise, though the bible contains some fantastical items that you might not accept, it is primarily a historical document. Consider the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy; there are precious few elements that anyone would describe as mythological but a lot of information that is rather splendid for historians to study (how the ancient Israelites built the tabernacle, their cultural practices, social roles, population, etc). Consider the Hittites, which were long thought to be a "biblical myth" until archeological evidence confirmed it. Or consider the city of Jericho, which was stated to have been destroyed and reconstructed in the bible long before archeologists found it and confirmed the statements to be true.



Additionally, there is the question of the quality of the historical records. Textual analysis indicates that the stories have not been greatly corrupted by latter generations (to offer perspective again, textual analysis indicates that documents like the Iliad or the Vedas have been substantially compromised by latter generations), there are numerous copies of almost all sections of the bible, and those sections were all penned near the time that the events happened (that is a bit subjective, but generally within 300 years or less; in some cases, significantly less). Add that to the discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and we have a very reliable text, unlike the Vedas (written a few thousand years after the fact, few and contradicting copies, corruption by later generations, few confirmations of events outside the text, etc).



However, to note, the Vedas aren't technically mythological either. They do not possess the same historical clout as most of the bible, but myths generally specifically refer to religious beliefs that people do not still believe in.

Answer 3

A great many mythical stories have known roots in fact. Large portions of the Koran are considered historically accurate.



From Genesis 12 on, the Old Testament is an historical account of the nation of Israel. Much of it can be verified by archeology, and I'm not aware of any findings that dispute the historical accounts. This lends credibility to the Bible as being something more than pure myth, even if it is as nothing more than a history book.

Answer 4

The problem is the difficulty in separating the historically "true" parts from the obviously mythical parts. While this is easy in regards to The Garden of Eden and Noah, it becomes more tricky when dealing with the sections talking about which kings defeated who and what cities were destroyed in battle (yes, here's the city where the bible said it should be, and here's evidence of a battle at about the right time, but did God personally tell Joshua to go to war, and did God ensure victory?)



To depersonalize it, let's take Homer's Iliad. Heinrich Schliemann though the epic poems must be more than myth. Using the text, he found the city, right where Homer said it would be. More recent archaeologists have found evidence of a great destruction from about the time when Homer said it should be. Does that mean Eos, the Rosy Fingered Goddess of dawn, begins everyday? Does it mean that Zeus, Hera, Aphrodite, Ares, etc., intervened on behalf of specific warriors?



Or, take current events. History will recall, with great accuracy, the US led invasion of Iraq and its consequences. History will also record Sarah Palin's statement that it is God's Will that we do this (as well as Osama Bin Laden's claim that it is God's Will for him to do what he does.) But if these event were taking place four to six thousand years ago when the line between history and myth wasn't clearly drawn or even recognized, wouldn't it have been recorded that God willed this invasion?



Another process you can look at is best exemplified by King Arthur. Whatever (and there are least six good candidates) Romano-British or Welsh warrior or kinglet fighting AGAINST Anglo-Saxon incursion gave rise to the Arthur Legends, there can be no doubt that other famous stories and deeds started attaching themselves to his name in the retelling. So by the time the stories are finally written down the twelveth century, we have a full set of myths that bear little resemblence to whatever seed of fact they started with.



And I'm in agreement with those who say the historiocity of exact events is beside the point. The power is in the stories themselves. We are a story telling species. It is how we understand the world. And the enduring or rediscovered stories show us the development of our collective consciousness. As I say often on this forum, "Myth has broader shoulders than fact, because it carries a larger burden of Truth."

Answer 5

(Neutral)

Point the first, I suppose, is that the Bible can entirely conceivably be considered a "Report" of events without being asserted to be "the truth" in its entirety. Even were we to go on the assumption that everything contained therein is pure fiction, we still have the historical value that comes from considering the contextual relevance of the reports to the writers. For instance, the Gospel of Luke is an assembly of different accounts of the figure of Christ; that everyone Luke talked to was telling the truth is not necessarily as important as the question of what it was they were trying to explain, and the information we can gather about the response to the Christ figure at the time of authorship.



Point the second, that part of the Bible explicitly comes from a multiplicity of Authors (at least, that it can be analysed as having come from a multiplicity of authors) often gives it additional levels of historical interest. Although Hindu texts can probably ascribe authorship to millions in the faith's long tradition, that the texts are themselves subscribed to divine revelation often works against their historicity. The same is true of some, but not all, of Christian work.



Finally, point the third, Abrahamic tradition has a tendency to blur the distinction between telling myth and telling history, preferring to try to describe both using the same language and frames of reference. More esoteric religions generally make their mythology more explicit, and consequently, often don't need historical accuracy in order to get their point across. Although I personally prefer the idea of considering theology in mythological terms, Judeo-Christian perspectives have deliberately written their texts to prevent that approach to interpretation being utilised. Much to its detriment, in my opinion.

Answer 6

Because of all the evidence and Archaeological evidence for the Bible:



#1. The Tigris and Euphrates river (Genesis 2:14)

#2. Noah and the flood. - Ark found in the mountains of Ararat. (Genesis 8:4)

#3. Sodom and Gomorrah. - Sulphur balls found in the dead sea (not anywhere near a volcano) (Genesis 19:24)

#4. Pharaoh's chariot wheels found in Red Sea (Exodus 15:19)

#5. The rock Moses struck and water gushed out. - (Numbers 20:11)

#6. Dinosaurs - (Job 40:15-41)

#7. God hangs the world on nothing - (Job 26:7)

#8. Jesus of Nazareth - Josephus' Account

#9. Knowledge will increase - (Daniel 12:4)



#10. Man claiming to be Christ - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn4nppx1cuE&feature=related (Matthew 24:5)



#11. Wars and rumors of wars - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7UEDqJONww - (Matthew 24:6)



That's one of the reasons why...

Answer 7

you're taking delusion with the aid of fact the different of actuality yet in faith that's not genuine. the main suitable definition of delusion I even have examine is from Robert O'Connell that proclaims that 'myths are thoughts instructed via people approximately people: the place they arrive from, how they handle substantial mess ups, how they handle what they could and how each and everything will end.' in case you look at delusion in that easy, each and every tale from Adam to Paul is a delusion. Christians do believe that Jesus walked on water; Hindus do believe that Ravan had 10 heads etc. this does not advise that any of those statements are genuine or untrue. those are purely legends that are seen literal truths via some, allegories via others and straightforward untruth via something. in spite of which team you fall under, all of those are seen myths.

Answer 8

Nebtet, the main problem with that approach is that not all religions and religious writings can be the correct ones, that's an impossibility so there has to be only be one true religion and the rest false. It's simply a matter of finding out which one is the true religion. But that doesn't mean that you can't choose any religion you want too.



Hall of Skulls, I've seen you answer several questions in R&S with erroneous information. You really need to update your data bank with legitimate facts and not simply parrot what others have told you.

Answer 9

There has to be a track record. There is an entire magazine dedicated to archeology that proves Biblical historic records. There is, for example, great evidence that even Mt. Sinai has been found. Ancient civilization mentioned in the Bible have recently been discovered. Even the Smithsonian uses the Bible to find ancient cities in the Middle East.



Track record is everything in regard to proving events as accurate or mythology.



I am currently gathering a list of "seals" that belong to people mentioned in the Bible. I did not know that there were as many as there were. Incredible finds!



The Bible said that Pilate was tetriarch of Judea. No one believed it because there were no records of Pilate in Rome. Then they found the stone in Caesarea that confirmed it.



No records of a King David. They just unearthed a stone marker dedicated to him in the area of Dan in Israel.



The Bible spoke of a people that dwelt within the rocks. No one believed it until they discovered Petra.



Scholars have said that there wasn’t a Pool of Siloam and that John was using a 'religious conceit’ to illustrate a point. Workers repairing a sewage-pipe break uncovered the Pool of Siloam in Old Jerusalem.



The Siloam Inscription was discovered in 1880 on the rock facing near the opening of the tunnel leading from the Gihon Spring to the Pool of Siloam. It records the successful completion of the tunnel by Hezekiah (725-697 BC). 2 Chronicles 32:30



Several of Solomon's stables as noted in 2 Chronicles 9:25



Modern archeology has made numerous discoveries which confirm events recorded in The Bible, including bricks without straw at Pithon. Lower levels had good quality straw, middle levels had less (including much which was torn up by the roots, as someone in a rush to meet a quota would be inclined to do), and the top levels had no straw at all.



Bible critics had long sneered at references in the Bible to a people called the Hittites and that the Hittites were simply one of the many mythical peoples made up by Bible writers. Toward the end of the 19th century, Hittite monuments were uncovered at Carchemish on the Euphrates River in Syria, proving the Bible right. Later, in 1906, excavations at Boghazkoy in Turkey and uncovered thousands of Hittite documents, revealing a wealth of information about Hittite history and culture.



And much more.

Answer 10

Hall of Skulls - the events depicted in the Bible actualy took place they are not myths. the facct that the life of our lord fits the messiah motif, does nto prove the sory of our lord incoorect, as a catholci we have a history of taditon i addtion to the parts we wrote down, of eyewittness accoutns to the events, as well, as a chruch that the main character in the myth founded. nothing in greek roaman or norse mythoogy can comepare with this. In additon we have coraboting wdocuemtnation from the roman empire, the were not prehsitoric.

With regad to the old testment it is essientally a jewis history book. they have the smae hsitroy of threadition with reard to the old testament as we do with the new.



You're gonna haev to dobetter than this.

Answer 11

Not all Christians treat the Bible as a history book. In fact, some would argue that to do so is to miss the point.

Answer 12

No one that I know of has said that the historical aspects of other texts are not valid.



What Christians say is that they are of no use spiritually as they do not provide the means of salvation for sin.



Edit

Brian H: If the Old Testimant is no longer valid then how do you explain that Ezekiel 37 is being fulfilled as we speak?

Answer 13

because it is true. it would be like saying that the stories of how the USA got started is just a myth but we all know that those really happened

Answer 14

only when another myth helps them "prove" their own will they offer it up as "fact."



take their "global flood" myth. they say that cultures all over the world have similar myths. well, if they want to claim that one particular myth from that culture is true, why not the rest? oh yea, cuz the rest would mean that there are other gods. and they can't have that, now can they.



there are over 3400 documented "gods" that are assosiated with various myths worldwide. to say that only one out of all the myths is true, must be bordering on insanity.

Answer 15

I think you confuse the existence of archaeological evidence of peoples existence with their beliefs about their deities and the actual existence of them. We know Christ was the son of God because, as he said, no other man had ever done the things that He did, therefore, the unbelievers and pagans are, up to this day without excuse.

Answer 16

Heres the proof that the people,places and events in the bible were real: https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20080901182734AA7dJf6

Answer 17

Considering some stuff in the Bible was stolen from other myths, like Epic of Gilgamesh (Noah's ark), Sargon (Moses) and Mithra (Jesus). Shouldn't this God of theirs be brought up on plagiarism charges?



The holy books are "true" only to those who believe in them.



Why do you call the TRUTH, "religious bias crap?"

Because that's what it is, the TRUTH.



Deist

Answer 18

Throw the Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ, into the mix, talking about a whole set of other people, stories, etc.

Answer 19

There is no creation story or set of myths about a god or gods that is any more valid than any other.

Answer 20

you not gonna get great answers to this, and you certainitly wont get any proof at all unless you count god did it or jesus loves me as proof



thought the bible was the word of god, as in it was all true every bit....just ingore the old testamwnt nobody talks about that anymore

Answer 21

Christianity would be a lot healthier if that was the official line.

Answer 22

Because the Bible is inspired Word of God, time tested and very reliable.

Answer 23

because to actually practice stirs the Spirit and its real to some people ..

Answer 24

BECAUSE THESE WORDS WERE TOLD BY JESUS.

Answer 25

Cuz its like calling God a liar which He isnt!! do you believe Worldbook? Jesus is also in that too..