Featured Why we should read OT narrative like general fiction

I'll stick with my Tom Wolfe comparison. Anyone read The Right Stuff? (And I mean read it, not watch the movie.) It's a reporting of history, but written as narrative. Like large portions of the OT, a history written in the narrative form, unlike a strict chronicle, for example.

 

The question:
Why should we read OT narrative like general fiction literature?

My interpretation of the question:
Why should we read OT narrative the same way as we would read general fiction literature, i.e., in lieu of reading the Bible as if the reading of it is a religious act in itself.

IMO, you're wayyy overeacting to this.

 

Hi Kyrednect, I thought my post indicated no one should read the OT like general fiction. BTW, I believe in choice, and choice includes rejecting the premise of the question.

If you disagree with my assessment, please specify where I missed the boat. I presented the way I was taught to read the OT.

 

1) Suggesting the OT be considered general fiction.
2) As if it were general fiction
3) I thought my post indicated no one should read the OT like general fiction

Who said "biblical narrative literature was fiction,"

If you disagree with my assessment, (read the OT as if it were historical living parables) please specify where I missed the boat. I presented the way I was taught to read the OT.

 

I was taught in freshman English class at a secular state university to take it the other way around: modern fiction and literature derives plot, characterization, themes, expression, and idioms more from the Bible than any other source. As a result, one can not understand fictional literature without a knowledge of the Bible and not vice versa.

 

I don't see much difference. Do we believe that Jesus' parables were historical events?

 

Hi Rob, yes viewing the OT as historical living parables, which requires searching the layered meanings, employs the same positive attributes offered by Deacon's suggested approach, but without the baggage.

I think the NT "parables" might be based on historical events, but Jesus may have paraphrased the accounts to stress the underlying spiritual truth. And of course, I take Jesus at His word.

In any event, that was how I was taught (discipleship class) to read the OT.

 

I think that my question has angered you. I was just asking for a friend.

 

Who? Church Mouse Dude?

 

Anybody ever read a chronological Bible? There are several translations available--NKJV Chronologica Bible, NIV Chronological Bible. My wife has the NIV Chronological Bible and reading it helps to understand the context of history and also puts a fresh viewpoint on the Bible. It kind of forces you to read the Bible as if it's a novelization. It's quite enlightening.

 

Yes.

 

This book is written by classical theists (Calvinism/Arminianism). Classical theism cannot take the Old Testament at face value. Take the 32nd chapter of Exodus as an example. The Classical theist has to say one has to read this chapter like a book of fiction. The systematic theology will often compare this chapter to a Mickey Mouse animation by saying this is an anthropomorphisation of God. The classical theist cannot take this scripture at face value. They have to fictionalize it. In fact, they have to do this throughout the Bible. But they especially have to do this in the Old Testament because the Old Testament blatantly exposes classical theism as a lie. So the writers threw out answer choice B in order to make sure that people knew that they weren’t saying the Bible isn’t true, they’re just saying that there are literary elements which are needed to properly interprete the Old Testament.

 

The problem with sweeping generalizations is that it only takes a couple of counter examples before they crumble.