Teaching the Bible as fiction?

[badlands]

Many atheists wish to put it in the fictional section like other myths. They say it will stop the religions wars. At all religions go by the Bible or believe in JEsus Christ, the same way not all fiction are myths. There are poems and historical fiction. They believe if one part is a myth then all parts are.There is no fall so no need for redemption or jesus.It would be fine for the other religions to persecuate christians of this since they dont' believe it anyways or the Bible. By saying everything in the Bible is fiction and myths,would be like saying Herod the great is a fictional character and Caesar Augustus.There was no pharoah or caesars or egyptians or persians.There are no pyramids,etc. This could be considered anti jew and middle easterns especially to a child who is from Egyot. They probably would say I have seen the pyramids. They are real. There are pro and cons with teaching the Bible as fiction. Many teachers have a hard time teaching the standarized tests.They will help them a bit since there are a lot of different literature in the Bible.There are laws and poems.

[inked]

The Biblia (the books) -the Bible- has too much archeological and historical backing to be categorized as fiction. There have been many attempts to discredit individual books and the whole canon. Lots of conspiracy theories and other true fictions about it.

People have made careers trying to "demythologize" it to suit "modern" and now postmodern persons who "can't believe all those fairy tales" and other less intelligent descriptions. But none of them have worked.

Both Tolkien (who proposed it to CS Lewis) and CS Lewis regarded the Bible as
"myth become fact". I suggest you read their LETTERS (each has multiple available sources) for their considered views.

The "assured results of higher criticism" have fallen to historical and archeological research. The critics usually ignore them. Whole civilizations have been found that had been lost to history because of the writings in the First Testament/Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. There are carved inscriptions proving Luke's usage of titles, once a point to claim no one had ever used them therefore he made them and all the rest of it up, which validate Luke's accuracy. So, a little research demonstrates the falsity of the ASSUMPTION that the whole is a fiction.

Have fun reading about it. The field is very exciting.

[Boomstick]

I don't think the Bible is "taught" much anywhere anymore in the public system, be it as fiction or otherwise, is it? So it's kind of a moot point.

[august]

Conceivably a college prep high school might have a comparative religion class as an elective.....

Plus plenty of people go to church schools, like you and me.

Now when you get to the college level, you really can't study creation myths in anthropology and just leave out anything Judaeo-Christian... and you really can't study intermediate Greek without reading the New Testament.

And a really good example of studying the Bible as literature - without worrying about whether it's fictional or not - was in a speech class I took, on Oral Interpretation (insert all Beavis-like wisecracks here - we made 'em all too ) where we analyzed some of the language of the King James translation of the Bible.

Fortunately, to address the original poster's point, atheists don't get to decide what section things go into, only librarians do. And they stick the Bible under "religion."

[Boomstick]

Originally Posted by august

Fortunately, to address the original poster's point, atheists don't get to decide what section things go into, only librarians do. And they stick the Bible under "religion."

Right, and it's not as though the Bible and Christian books are the only school of thought represented in the religion section.

[Alvin Eriol]

It seems to me that the ancient pagan myths are called so & studied as fiction because very few if any people still profess belief in them as revealed truth. Adherents to a faith tend to take umbrage to having their faith & scriptures called "myth" (in the popular sense uninformed by JRRT's essays and letters on the subject). How would Muslims react to having the Q'uran classed as "myth?" Observant Jews would already have cause to resent the minimization of the Old Testament (i.e. the Torah and the Prophets, etc); would they tolerate having the Talmud and Mishna and so forth similarly characterized? Suppose the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price were relegated to "myth?" Bhagavad-Gita?

Comparative religion as taught in secular schools takes a noncommittal secular PoV that all religions contain truths and are worth studying as historical, cultural, literary, and sociological constructs, without claiming one or another is true. In all fairness, that's the best one should expect of a non-sectarian school.

Inked, you reminded me of something I'd read myself years ago. The Hittites mentioned in the Book of Genesis had been dismissed by many "enlightened" 18-19th cent. scholars as completely made-up. Archeological discoveries including archives of books and documents revealed not only the truth of the Hittites' existence as revealed in Genesis, but a fascinating dimension to such episodes as Abraham's purchase of the burial plot for his wife. It turned out that the scene of Abraham meeting the seller Ephron at the city gate before the elders was an authentic depiction of Hittite property transfer law. Furthermore, it explained that strange little feature of Ephron insisting Abraham buy the entire lot rather than just the burial cave. Under Hittite law of the time, only by transferring the entire parcel of land could the seller be relieved of the tax obligations associated with it! So (according to the passage I read) we were actually being shown an example of a Middle Bronze age tax minimization strategy, not an inexplicable act of charity or generosity on the seller's part.

[Boomstick]

Originally Posted by Alvin Eriol

Inked, you reminded me of something I'd read myself years ago. The Hittites mentioned in the Book of Genesis had been dismissed by many "enlightened" 18-19th cent. scholars as completely made-up. Archeological discoveries including archives of books and documents revealed not only the truth of the Hittites' existence as revealed in Genesis, but a fascinating dimension to such episodes as Abraham's purchase of the burial plot for his wife. It turned out that the scene of Abraham meeting the seller Ephron at the city gate before the elders was an authentic depiction of Hittite property transfer law. Furthermore, it explained that strange little feature of Ephron insisting Abraham buy the entire lot rather than just the burial cave. Under Hittite law of the time, only by transferring the entire parcel of land could the seller be relieved of the tax obligations associated with it! So (according to the passage I read) we were actually being shown an example of a Middle Bronze age tax minimization strategy, not an inexplicable act of charity or generosity on the seller's part.

That's amazing. The more things change the more they stay the same, eh? Tax loopholes in the time of Abraham. Who would have thought?