Continuing yesterday’s discussion, I need to emphasize that I’m NOT (edit, 11:55 a.m.) denying the historical nature of the Bible. I’m saying that the Bible was written differently than we might expect or even want.
Here’s why:
- The Bible wasn’t written to record history. I know I’ve said that, but it needs to be emphasized. Look at the book of Genesis. We blow through centuries of the world’s existence, then come to a screeching halt when we get to Abraham. We stroll through his life and that of the next few generations. Then in Exodus we blow by several centuries before stopping again at Moses. It’s not the story of everyone; it’s the story of certain people that shaped the formation of the nation of Israel.
At first glance, the stories from the books of Samuel and the books of Kings are repeated in the books of Chronicles. But they’re not. The first four books were written to a nation in exile, explaining how they ended up in exile. The last two were written to a nation that was rebuilding. Chronicles emphasizes the covenant and the temple, because the people were being called to rally around those two elements. It’s not just history about the different kings. It’s the history that’s needed to teach. - The Bible was written in a way that fit its original context. It wasn’t written for Westerners. It wasn’t written to satisfy the modern mind. It doesn’t treat facts the way we treat them. Numbers are more symbolic than they are quantitative. When one writer says 7000 were killed and another says 70,000, we say it’s an inaccuracy. They don’t see it that way. The 7 is symbolic as are the thousands. Lots of people were killed in an impressive victory (perfect, even, with the numeric symbolism).
- The Bible expresses things within the understanding of its readers. We know that the sun doesn’t really rise nor set. The ancient readers didn’t know that. We know the earth doesn’t have four corners; they weren’t aware of that. Much has been made of people finding scientific clues in the Bible, but I think that’s a misguided effort. God wasn’t teaching them natural science. He was teaching them how to live according to His covenant.
Others express these concepts much better than I. I lay them out to show my current understanding of inspiration and revelation, that they intentionally occurred within human contexts, adapting themselves to those contexts. When we try to force them to play by the rules of our context, we find that they don’t always oblige.
I’ve enjoyed reading this blog the past couple of days. I’ve certainly thought about some ideas that I haven’t thought of before in any great depth. I have a few questions. What standards or criteria existed for valid historical writing at the time of Christ? I think Tim gies examples that demonstrate that the Bible doesn’t meet current standards of historical writing (or scientific writing). But, were standards different in the past? If so, how? Was history even defined in the same way?
I know I shouldn’t read too much into what others have written, but when I read the first paragraph, I wanted to read the word “not” between “I’m” and “denying” …. :)
Nice post, Tim.
Thanks, Keith, for reading what I meant to write. Goodness, that was a bad typo!
Yep, that clears up a bunch!!
The Bible is accurate for what it means to convey. If we put different expectations on it, we are the ones at fault.
Jeffrey, the discipline of history as we know it is a modern construct. The ancients viewed history as story, not as we view it. Google “historiography” to get an introduction to the topic.
Thanks, Wendy!
Excellent!
I recently had the opportunity to teach the Torah. I had some concerns about how best to present the first few chapters of Genesis. Finally I decided to begin by looking at it against the background of the myths of the people around the early people of God as opposed to the background of Darwinian evolution. Darwin had not gained much popularity before the times of Noah, Abraham or Moses. Against an early polytheistic backdrop, the biblical creation account would have shouted out a powerful new paradigm. God is powerful, organized, peaceful, compassionate, empowering, and he provides what is best to fill man’s needs.