Featured Why we should read OT narrative like general fiction

I would discard that material. Life is too short.

 

We shouldn't.
General fiction is written by men, while the "Old Testament" was written by men who were directed what to write, by God.

 

I think it's an excellent approach, no different (or same affect) from the instructions I followed from my Bible teacher many years ago:

'Strip away everything that you think you know about the Bible and approach it as a child that knows nothing, praying as David, "Let me behold wondrous things out of thy law". Begin on page one and read through as quickly as possible in order to get the ideal of it'.

Exactly.

 

There is a sense in which we should read anything as it is written. We err if we read spiritual meaning into the biblical text. The Bible is not a mystical book. It is not meant to be beyond human comprehension. That said, it does contain mystery and certain things will be hidden from our understanding this side of eternity. While I understand the likelihood that "C" is the answer, readers need to understand that the Bible is the Word of God. In order to understand it, we need to study it, not just read it as general literature. We have to wrestle with it. We have to pray for understanding because it is the Holy Spirit that allows the Word to profit our soul.

 

Interesting anecdote...when I was in high school in Northern New Jersey, there was an elective called "The Bible as Literature". I did not become a Christian until a month prior to my graduation and I did not take the class. I always wondered what the class was like.

 

Guessing it is C.

Can you explain why it is C. ?

Thanks

 

Just asking for a friend--how do you distinguish yourself from Julius Wellhausen?

 

You make me think of "New Journalism," and some of it's major producers. The way Tom Wolfe and others reported their material from inside the narrative.

 

Well, I see no mention in his post of a JEDP breakdown, so there's that.

 

Hmm. That probably has something to do with Julius Wellhausen but I guess that I don't know what. Are you an English major?

 

Do you just throw the name Wellhausen out there like a profanity?

I'm no fan of Wellhausen or his work, but literary criticism isn't on par with a documentary hypothesis, so I don't see your point of slinging Wellhausen's name around.

Literary criticism is used around here daily. Usually when someone says something along the lines of "it's an epistle, so it was writen to believers, and must be interpreted thusly..."

 

Wow, who said Wellhausen is a profanity? I just asked for a friend if your method was the same as Wellhausen's? Just asking. Are you an English major?

 

I had assumed that your opinions on Wellhausen were rather negative. If you're a fan of his, then my point fails. Regardless, outside of liberal theology, asking someone in evangelical circles if their method is the same as Wellhausen's is akin to asking a politician if their method is the same as Hitler's.

As for education, I spent 5 semesters majoring in English. Switched to history, though.

 

I suppose one could read the OT as if its fiction if they want. If I were talking to someone who had done that and they were trying to explain it to me their view would then be suspect at best. I think it is a bad solution looking for a problem. How about read the OT for what it is, a writing that reveals God's heart written to His special creation that they may know Him, and understand all the language genre's along the way. If we divorce God from the method in which we approach the scriptures then we risk all sorts of ungodly interpretations. It is a spiritual books, let's be filed with the Spirit, be sensitive to the Spirit, and be prayerful.

 

Doing so would mean you would have to stop believing it. Sounds Satanic to me.
MB

 

I do not read the OT as if it were fictional literature, but rather as "living parables." The accounts are to be understood as historical, but for the purpose of teaching spiritual truth. This approach employs the elements of critical thinking (i.e. what is His point, what should I take away and apply) without suggesting the OT be considered "general fiction."