Featured Why we should read OT narrative like general fiction

Good thoughts. Of course, though Asimov predicted calculators (I'd forgotten that), he didn't predict that they would disappear after a few years or be only an app on a PC or a phone.

And you are right about him being a wise fool: incredible knowledge of science (sometimes out of date), but zero knowledge about the true God, in spite of being a Jew. Ever read Asimov's Guide to the Bible? It had nothing but outdated theories and anti-Bible speculation.

 

I've only read about that book, and enough of his comments on theology in general and Christianity in particular to decide my time would be better spent.
And talking about dated, I still use that size calculator. I especially like the x-to-the-y function, especially for the long term financial analysis that's important in forest management. Suppose I could do it on my desktop, but I already know where all the relevant keys are on my circa-1985 TI critter.

 

Bet you can't buy a new one nowadays.

Oops. Just looked on Amazon and there are plenty for sale. Probably just bought by fossils like you and me, though.

 

I could and probably would get very critical over the suggestion to input a belief of fiction into studying the Word of Truth. Further, to present this study suggestion as if it is an established truth is where the fiction lies.

 

Michael S. Heiser?

Frequently Asked Questions - Dr. Michael Heiser

 

Has got to be one of the most anti-intellectual arguments for something I have ever come across. It's a story so read it like fiction? Really need to put more thought into that.

 

I'd have a hard time imagining scripture as fiction. Maybe that's because it's God's word and I love it. I wish there were more if it. I'm at my happiest when reading and studying it. Nothing compares to it.
In order to think it to be fiction would be thinking of it as a lie. I believe it to be absolute truth so it would be impossible for me.
MB

 

I really don't think Heiser has thought this through. Should I tell the typical Japanese believer to read the story of David like I would read The Tale of Genji, the first Japanese novel? That would be to encourage immoral thinking.

 

Herman Wouk's "Caine Mutiny" was totally a work of fiction, but 25 years later the nonfiction "The Arnheiter Affair" by Neil Sheehan provided a near-identical parallel narrative involving naval miscommand issues. Depending on which one you read first, that would color and influence your understanding of the other.

So also, it would seem, with the OT narratives and certain aspects of modern fiction.

 

But OT historical narrative is not written like modern fiction. That brings up the point that to read ancient narrative as if it were modern fiction is an anachronism. In Bible translation we avoid anachronisms, such as referring to a chariot as a car (to give an extreme example). The novel is a comparatively recent phenomenon in literature. Why would we inject the conventions of a modern novel into any ancient literature (Homer's Odyssey, the Didache, Josephus--any of them)?

To continue, we seldom know the thoughts or motives of the historical characters in the Bible, other than their rebellion against or obedience to God. In other words, we learn of their character. Think of the OT description of Moses: "Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth" (Num. 12:3). I've never read a modern novel of any genre that described the main character that way. Usually it is externals, such as: "He was a big man, 230 pounds, built like a rock. He had flaming red hair and fierce blue eyes." OT narrative and modern fiction are, I say again, apples and oranges.

Again, this is anachronizing. Granted, in the Bible deeds are important, but the purpose of the characterization is quite different in the two genres. Since the Bible is inspired, the goal of every characterization in the OT is to glorify God, not to glorify the man or woman. The purpose of the characterization of a fictional hero, on the other hand, is usually to glorify the hero. God seldom enters into the picture, but in the OT, God Himself is the hero of ever event.
​

As a Bible translator, I do my best to leave ambiguity in place. There are places in the narrative where God wants us to think through the situation with godly principles in mind. For example, I am tasked right now with writing a set of SS lessons based on the book of Joshua. I began writing about the story of the Gibeonites prejudiced against them. As I read and evaluated the whole incident, I came to see them as seeking the true God, not just trying to avoid destruction. However, I had to read between the lines somewhat to arrive there. There is always ambiguity in history, but the writer of modern fiction seeks to take away ambiguity, especially in such genres as detective fiction, or action adventure. Fiction readers don't want ambiguity, they want clarity, but God has inserted ambiguity in the sacred text (as exists in all history accounts) to make us think.

 

I agree with your entire post, but excerpted the last paragraph to offer thanks for the insight on the Gibeonites. In my intermittent preaching opportunities (when our pastor is on vacation or a missions trip), I've been working thru Joshua. My most recent message covered the 2nd battle of Ai and its aftermath, so Gibeon is right around the corner. I will look at this passage with a different mindset (perhaps no mindset at all, other than God's glory, might be best.)

Bet you can't buy a new one nowadays.
Bought one last year, house brand from S_____S, inexpensive and with more functions than the old beast. Unfortunately, the display is lousy and unless one strikes the keys exactly, precisely centered, they often don't register. After a couple weeks of frustration, I sidelined the new and returned to the old. Decimal point key hasn't worked for decades, but thanks to God's provision I've long been able to ignore the decimal until calculations are complete, then add it in the most logical spot. (Thus, I never make small errors.)

 

To me, what’s funny about all of this is that I have yet to meet a pulpiteer who never uses license to embellish Bible stories by adding elements and speculating imaginatively.

 

[

Uriah Heep in Dickens' David Copperfield self-proclaimed himself as one of the humblest men on earth. So no reason Moses couldn't have written something similar (another nice interchange between fiction and biblical narrative).

 

Point taken, but that brings up another point. The term "general fiction" was used. What in the world does that mean? There are many kinds of fiction. Are they all valid for understanding the OT? If I were to read the OT as fiction, what kind of fiction are we talking about? Romance novels? Detective stories? Horror stories?

It's all too general

Please give an example.

Well, think of that book as fiction, as a detective story, then. But yes, I see this point.

Try asking your students what they read fiction for. Most people read fiction like I do, for entertainment, but the OT is a spiritual book. ( That is the "far deeper" part for me, not the characterization, the plot (is it part of the list of possible plots?), the background. So when I read that we should read the OT as if it were fiction, I am thinking, "Entertainment!" But the Bible is not meant to be understood that way, but for it's spiritual depth. "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit."

Therefore, if the course you are teaching does not teach the doctrine of illumination (I hope it does), it's insistence that we read the OT as fiction is going to actually lead the student astray rather than help them. In fact, for a beginning class such as that, illumination is the main thing I would teach.

 

I want to first state that I believe in the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. The next thing I need to say is that I think most people advocating for that position is that they take a very narrow view of authorship.

As a professional writer and editor, there is almost always at least two people involved in the production of any piece of professional writing -- the originator of most of the content and prose, and the editor(s) who work with the initial writer. And sometimes a person will employ a writer to help them create (in terms of words) and tell their stories, both anonymously or with a byline (like Bill O'Reilly's "Killing..." series).

I imagine that Moses commissioned the collection and recording of the oral stories of the children of Israel (the book of Genesis), and worked with a team of people to put the stories together in a coherent narrative. This takes nothing away from inspiration, since God can work through groups of people performing a task just as well (or better) than a single person completing a task.

To your comment, I don't think that Moses personally wrote that he was the most humble, but a God-inspired scribe who was recording things under the authority of Moses wrote it. That's also how a book "written by Moses" can record his death and burial (Deuteronomy 34:6-7) without any contradiction or issue or authorship. It is likely this same team continued their work with Joshua.

And of course, we see this in the New Testament with Paul, Peter, etc., using scribes to help them record their letters. We know this because Paul makes a point of calling out where he is writing in his own hand (1 Corinthians 16:21; Galatians 6:11; Colossians 4:18; 2 Thessalonians 3:17; and Philemon 1:19).