Reply #154: Why not, "I believe that the Bible is Myth" Why tell others what to think

[Selwynn]

We do we always have to start fights? I'm quite comfortable saying "I believe..." and by adding those words, it is my intention to make room for others who believe differently. It's not up to me to evaluate whether I think they are objectively right or wrong. It doesn't hurt me when someone else says "I believe the Bible is true." The only thing that hurts me is when they say "the Bible is true - I'm deciding the issue for you. I reject your right to decide for yourself, I choose to tell you what is right and wrong, true and untrue."

I certainly wouldn't want to be guilty of the same thing.

I believe that the issue of "truth" is more complicated. I believe that there is a different between literal truth and spiritual truth - and by spiritual truth I believe that means metaphor and symbolism, things that represent larger truths figuratively. I believe that there may be some literal truths to be found in scripture, but I also personally believe that much of scripture should be seen as representative, or pointing to spiritual truths. To me, a lot of the scripture is like a big parable - a story that has the potential for very positive meaning for some, whether literally true or not.

One of the most life-changing stories I've ever read was a work of fiction. That is was fiction did not chance the fact that it certainly pointed to deep and meaningful truths about my experience. I cherished it deeply. There is more to "truth" than just literalism.

Old Testament scholar Phyllis Tribble wrote:

"To appropriate the metaphor of a Zen sutra, poetry is 'like a finger pointing to the moon.' It is a way to see light that shines in darkness, a way to participate in transcendent truth and to embrace reality. To equate the finger with the moon or to acknowledge the finger and not to perceive the Moon is to miss the point."

Just because the Bible might have the capacity to point beyond itself metaphorically, symbolically and theologically to something else doesn't mean it must be decried as irrelevant by any thinking reflective person. Nor does it mean it must be affirmed relevant. I leave that choice up to individuals. And I do not talk down to them, no matter which way they choose (at least I don't want to.)

I personally believe the Bible is like a "finger pointing to the moon." For me in my life, to falsely reduce it by claiming it is historically literal verbatim is to fundamentally miss the value of scared texts. That such texts include myths, parables, analogies and non-literal symbols does not dismiss its power at all for me. I never worshiped "the bible." I've only ever seen the bible as one particular window which carries with it at least the potential (for at least some people like me) to illuminate the deeper mysteries of life.

And if you feel differently, I respect that and call you friend. Why should we argue about it? I'm comfortable in your goodness of person without demanding that you at all points think precisely like I think. I would hope you could show me (and others) the same respect.

Sel