The Bible Among the Myths Essay Sample free essay sample

John N. Oswalt has long thought about the issue at manus sing the bible and it’s relation. if any. to the survey of myths. Get downing foremost in a class at Asbury Theological Seminary and germinating subsequently through surveies about the Mediterranean at Brandeis University. Oswalt has intently studied the subject and cultural impact over a important period of clip. This knowing period of survey has lead Oswalt to the place posed through this book ; â€Å"is the faith of the Old Testament basically similar to. or basically different from. the faith of its neighbours? † In peculiar within the modern-day survey of both history and myth. does the Bible tantrum within a peculiar definition? The book will seek to clear up the distinguishable difference of the Bible and myth in respects to the nature of deity and measure the impact mythology has on such an apprehension. Additionally the inquiry will be posed as to the historical truth of Old Testament Hagiographas and whether such an apprehension is a necessity for Christians today. Particularly Oswalt will seek to find whether our historical point of view of Scripture has an inseparable impact on our theological apprehension of it. While Oswalt concedes that his point of view presented within this book is non unequivocal and all embracing the statement is for the Bible to find the get downing topographic point of such an probe. Basically. that. the Bible is rather capable of replying many of it’s ain inquiries and grounds that supports the Bible’s claim to hold been brought about through disclosure be given the attending in which it deserves. In contrast. Oswalt argues that the cardinal incredulity to even such a possibility should hold no topographic point within the very treatment. The Bible and Myth: The Bible in its World Diving in. the first chapter presents a treatment sing the very nature of the Bible and it’s impact upon the universe. peculiarly within the manner we view world. It begins to look into the Bible’s impact. along with the impact of the Greek and Hebrew people. on Western worldviews. In respects to the Greek influence. their type of thought had a important impact upon society. In peculiar there are three primary parts are believed to be: 1 ) the belief in a â€Å"universe† alternatively of a â€Å"polyverse. † 2 ) the thought of simple cause and consequence. and 3 ) non-contradiction. In add-on the Hebrew people played as important a function through their impact on the worldview. Their foundational monotheistic belief so leaves a permanent impact but their other foundational constructs of God did to. The fact that God served a primary function in creative activity. that He exists apart from the creative activity. made himself known to people. made his desir es known to people. and that He rewards our punishes people for following or disobeying his will besides served to go forth a permanent impact. Through the combination of their varying attacks. the Greeks’ rational thought merged with the monotheism of the Hebrew people. along with the Greek belief in the jurisprudence of non-contradiction merged with the Hebrew belief in God being separate and distinguishable from creative activity. are foundational to our modern-day worldview and the statement of logic presented by Oswalt. It is in this statement that Oswalt presents adult male. in add-on to things like scientific discipline and logic. to be suicidal without the surpassing function of God. The Bible and Myth: A Problem of Definition It’s in the 2nd chapter that Oswalt begins to specify a foundational term to the apprehension of nature of his statement. and that is a definition of myth. While he attempts to happen suited replacings for the word along with a definition that best embodies the footings complexnesss. he must foremost revisit the trip by the academic community in respects to the distinction of the Bible from other Hagiographas. civilizations. or faiths of it’s clip. It is through this that he seeks to suitably sort the Bible and get down to turn to whether the Bible should be considered a myth or non. The trouble in such a undertaking is the legion definitions. for the term myth. presented by modern-day bookmans. In an attempt to outdo sum up the term Oswalt provides a sampling of each definition and an account of their insufficiencies. In sum-up of his sum-up we are presented with a few groups of definitions. one of which being in the class of historical-philosophical. In this class we are presented with the etymological definition. sociological-theological definition. and the literary definition. While each definition is alone. they all subscribe to the doctrine of continuity. which assumes that everything is non merely related but they are literally one in the same in some signifier or manner. As Oswalt put it is like a individual being â€Å"one with the tree. † With this doctrine. the person is non merely metaphorically â€Å"one† with the tree. but they are fundamentally a portion of the tree’s spirit and frailty versa. Continuity: The Basis of Mythical Thinking The 3rd chapter is best summarized by its rubric as it focuses chiefly on continuity. It is here where Oswalt farther explains what he briefly touches at the terminal of the 2nd chapter. the shared kernel of continuity among myths. The manner of thought in continuity positions all things as portion of each other in some manner. It leans on an apprehension that the three major forces ; the Godhead. nature. humanity. all exist on the same continuum. It is with this position that we see an extended range within the worldview. One of these effects mentioned is the prominence of detecting nature for marks. whether is an attempt to explicate inundations. fires. conditions or so on. Another consequence is the supposed usage of thaumaturgy to impact the universe around us. Additionally the arrested development on birthrate and gender that has overtaken people’s lives today is a ground for its consequence on continuity. In decision Oswalt summarizes what he feels are factors of specify ing a myth and seeks to eventually chase away many of the misconceptions sing myths. Oswalt presents myths as holding a shared belief in polytheism. utilize icons that interact with the Godhead and nature. and low intrinsic value placed on humanity itself ( as a consequence of holding no criterion of moralss ) . Additionally the Gods themselves are perceived as lowly. imperfect existences and the histories of creative activity normally involve a major struggle that brings it about. Transcendence: Footing of Biblical Thinking This concluding chapter in the first part of Oswalt’s book seeks to rectify the relationship between the scriptural worldview. which remains to be presented. and the humanistic worldview presented in the first three chapters. This is where we are presented with the term. transcendency. and the function God has played with creative activity in supernatural ways. Transcendence stands out from all modern-day belief systems for legion grounds. First and perchance the most obvious is the belief of monotheism. which sets it apart from all other faiths. Excluding Judaism. Christianity. and Islam who all derive from the bible about all other faiths are polytheistic. Additionally. alone to these faiths is the belief that God pre-existed. Meaning that nil existed before God and therefore everything is subservient to God. The concluding primary ground is the self-respect provided humanity through each narrative. Unlike many myths the Biblical narrative of humanity provides value and significance to their creative activity and being. Extra features that set Oswalt’s scriptural worldview apart from all others is the belief that God is supra-sexual. prohibits the pattern of thaumaturgy. and the being of an ethical codification by which humanity must obey. Many would hold transcendency to be a cardinal rule among those of scriptural idea. one that can non be replaced with mere believing that philosophical integrity would hold been imposed upon the Bible subsequently in it’s old ages. Oswalt wants to be clear that the very impression of invalidating transcendency for philosophical integrity is merely excessively luxuriant of a strategy that is excessively extremely unlikely. The Bible versus Myth The 2nd part of Oswalt’s book trades with the concern of history in this treatment. In peculiar this part seeks to manage the significance of what it means if the Bible is deemed historical or non. Oswalt looks to the changing ways in which ancient non-biblical texts documented information. in peculiar portents. lands. day of the month preparation. royal archives and records. However ; before traveling frontward to that point a important country of treatment within the construct of myths must be treatment. This concluding chapter in subdivision one focuses chiefly on the function in which moralss dramas in this treatment. The chapter divides these moralss into two different sets ; one set of moralss trades specifically with how people interacted with one another and the other with how people interacted with divinities. It is here country that the Bible stands clearly above other paperss of their clip. Oswalt notes there are several features that attribute to such a statement and include that these literatures are defined specifically by God and God entirely. that the codification of moralss he set signifier is applied universally to all humanity. and that when an expostulation by one adult male is held against another adult male it is finally a evildoing towards God himself. Oswalt is besides speedy to turn to the similarities between changing people groups that may be deemed important to the argument. While these countries of similarities. like pattern. look. and thought form. are shared they are likely merely incidental and non relevant to the individuality of these people groups. For illustration. many of the Psalms may portion common overtones of the typical looks found in civilizations around Israel but this is a consequences more so of Israel to the full take parting in the universe than it is Israel being indistinguishable to the universe around it. The Bible and History: A Problem of Definition This chapter may be best summarized by Oswalt’s opening sentence stating â€Å"†¦perhaps the cardinal differentiation. between myth and the Bible is that whereas the myths are based in the interrelatednesss among the Gods in aboriginal clip and infinite. the Old Testament about wholly avoids such a footing. † It is with that in head that he continues on to analyse several different sorts of ancient Hagiographas that have given bookmans an penetration into the lives of those during ancient times. These assorted signifiers of non-biblical Hagiographas include but are non limited to the portents. lands. day of the month preparation. royal archives and records antecedently mentioned. Numerous types of non-biblical Hagiographas by and large do non run into the criterion of history due to their usage of hyperboles. an accent on the person over the group. and several other grounds. Many ancient people failed to even use historic Hagiographas. Oswalt seeks to suggest an ap prehension for this in observing they did non see any importance in entering such information for the benefit of others. Additionally these people groups were non concerned with historic composing due to their self-involved point of view. It is of import to observe ; nevertheless. that the Bible is improbably alone in how it handles similar historical events. These records frequently dealt with persons as existent. imperfect people. The prominence given to human relationships besides holds the Bible unique in its representation of history. Is the Bible truly Historical: The Problem of History After specifying the nature of historiography and the position the scriptural worldview has on the Bibles footing for echt historic authorship. chapter seven seeks to cover with the difference between scriptural and historical fluctuations. In peculiar the Bible does non use thorough accounting of events while godly causing is really much prevalent. the really standard by which advancement is judged is measured through the Godhead. and the authorship manner is often anecdotal versus analytical. Oswalt uses these fluctuations to turn to some of the frequent issues that are held against the Bible in respects to its historical truth. In peculiar he seeks to concentrate on the constructs of disclosure. supernatural events. and an in depth expression at whether Israel was clearly different from other people groups in these countries. The chapter overall seeks to explicate how God’s supernatural disclosure of himself to humanity at the clip could do the Hebrewss to vouch that they w ould be cautious in verifying their Hagiographas for Godhead truths. Oswalt continues on to do the point that the Bible was non written to be an eyewitness history of events in most occurrences but alternatively to document the Godhead disclosure and construe the human-historical experience’s significance. Does it count whether the Bible is historical? As a continuance of the 7th chapter. and picking up on a treatment already started earlier in the book. we are presented here with the importance of understanding that the Bible is so a historically accurate papers. Oswalt wants to foreground the demand to acknowledge the whole Bible as historical. peculiarly when looking at the Pentateuch. books of poesy. and the Prophets. The writers are focused at depicting persons and detailing their relationships with others while seeking non to concentrate on their defects. Such a point of view can non be held without slightly changing the assorted point of views of history and that’s precisely what Oswalt does. He seeks to notate both the narrative ( or the Grecian word Geshichte ) and the existent events ( or the Grecian word Historie ) . It is through all of this that we can find both divinity and history are inseparable. as theological beliefs have stemmed from the historical events within the Bible. This can be seen in Oswalt’s illustration using Paul’s missive to the Corinthians ( 1 Cor. 15:13-17 ) . which presents the thought. an persons religion can non be unless there is a complete historical belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. When posed with inquiries sing the cogency of divinity if the Bible is historically in accurate Oswalts response is profound. â€Å"There is an internal logic out of which the divinity grows. a premiss on which it is based that is every bit indispensable to it as the decision. † God’s disclosure. his really interrupting into our clip and infinite. presents a foundational displacement within this treatment that recognizes both the historical events and the theological reading of them. It is this that sets the scriptural worldview and all other historic or literary worldviews in immensely different classs. Beginnings of the Biblical Worldview Oswalt’s following to last chapter seeks to undertake a assortment of alternate positions associating to the scriptural narration. The first position that he tackles is that of John Van Seters who affirms that Judaic priests at some point after the Babylonian expatriate had in some manner altered the Biblical text. Van Seters besides argues that the cultural and historic involvements of Israel arose of course from the dirts of those around them. The 2nd position is from Frank Cross who challenges that the Bible at some point was merely an heroic poem verse form and throughout history has been changed into the current province it is. peculiarly the Old Testament. The 3rd position comes from William Dever who believed that the state of Israel had a belief system about indistinguishable to their neighbours the Canaanites and Christian bookmans have purposefully overlooked these facts in order to show a better. yet inaccurate. image of ancient Israel. Unfortunately his thesis is founded on a general trust for other historiographers at the clip who had no motive to stand for the world of Yahweh. And eventually. Oswalt looks at Mark Smith who argues that the beliefs of the state of Israel originated out of the polytheistic beliefs of the Canaanites. Smith’s statements ; nevertheless. do non offer account for the legion inquiries raised sing the manner in which Yahwism of the Bible arose out of such distant. polytheistic faiths. In all. the chapter raises the inquiry as to whether modern-day bookmans have provided a convincing account for the legion alone characteristics presented within the scriptural worldview. Additionally how do they explicate the ways in which the scriptural worldview alters the apprehension of world in respects to the Bible? The chapter is neither thorough nor unequivocal but it clearly attempts to promote scriptural worldview and account as the most clear and practical. Decision Oswalt so utilizes the decision of his book to reemphasis the primary points from each old chapter. Overall he seeks to do clear the overarching subject that the contrast between non-biblical and scriptural positions of world. history. and myth are so rather extended and differing. In peculiar the scriptural position is grounded in the thought of transcendency or godly disclosure while the non-biblical position is founded on the construct of continuity. His thesis on which the full piece is centered is clearly laid out. that being â€Å"that in comparing to the other literatures of the antediluvian Near East. the Bible is characterized by a worldview that is aggressively different from all the remainder. † Without admiting this aggressively different worldview we fail to acknowledge the mode of representation of one’s apprehensions of life and peculiarly the cardinal importance of cognizing God non found in any other literature. These apprehensions and treatment ballads land to a deeper acknowledgment of who God is and the apprehensible actions or impact he has made through such disclosure. As Oswalt puts it. â€Å"the inquiry of what God’s will is and how he has chosen to uncover it becomes one of perfectly ultimate significance. † Mentions: [ 1 ] . John N. Oswalt. The Bible Among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature? ( Grand Rapids. Mich. : Zondervan. 2009 ) . 14. [ 2 ] .