How important is it that the events described in the OT happened historically?
This question has birthed out of the previous post and we are using the story of Jonah as an example. Again, if there is an Old Testament expert out there who would like to drop some knowledge bombs that would be great!
I have heard arguments both ways regarding "Jonah and the Whale". The best argument I have heard (and I'm sure the OT scholars out there will have plenty to chime in about) has been that, basically, if the bible doesn't give us reason to believe that a story should be taken as allegory, or parable, or analogy, etc, then we don't really have a choice but to accept it as historical fact. I know this doesn't really answer the question, and this totally dumbs down the argument, but it nonetheless gives us something to ponder: can God, who created something out of nothing, who rose again after death, who managed to fit all the animals of the world into a big boat, and made a donkey talk, etc, ....could he not keep a dude alive in a whale for a few days? Perhaps this is a perfect example of "does it matter if its fact, or allegory?". Does believing it as fact or allegory effect ones salvation? For some reason I don't have nearly as difficult a time accepting this one as I do with all the animals aboard "Noah's Ark"!
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Christ seemed to treat the Old Testament like an outdated legalistic document that needs revision. He would use the OT stories that the jews knew to explain himself to them (Matthew 12:40,41). Check out that verse. The historical verification of Jonah's whale belly experience was not the point nor does it's factuality matter. What mattered was that the Jews were familiar with such a story and this fact made a bridge for Jesus to beautifully articulate how his own departure would unfold.
@ Anonymous - Shrek has a talking donkey friend as well, but I'm not sure that he's kept anyone alive in a whale's belly yet. =]
thanks for your thoughts Anonymous and Brian. Jesus' attitude toward the OT, according to some of his critics at least, was one that was very cavalier and reading bits of his sermon on the mount you can see why (Matt 5-7). Paul, also, wrote about the OT in a way that some within the Jewish community were very offended by (read Galatians). While Jesus and Paul both affirmed the divinely inspired status of the OT, both believed in its fulfillment/completion in Jesus' life, death and resurrection.
Regarding the historical aspect of some of the OT stories, I will do some digging to see what Jesus' Jewish contemporaries thought about the historical value of Jonah, Noah etc... It will help to give us something to compare with the NT writers and see if there are any differences/similiarities in terms of their attitude towards these stories. In other words, I will be interesting to see whether or not it mattered to the Jewish community (there were lots of different Jewish communities in Jesus' day so there will likely be diversity in this) if these stories actually happened or if they were just important myths that helped shape their corporate identity, formed their sense of ethics, etc...
I have heard arguments both ways regarding "Jonah and the Whale". The best argument I have heard (and I'm sure the OT scholars out there will have plenty to chime in about) has been that, basically, if the bible doesn't give us reason to believe that a story should be taken as allegory, or parable, or analogy, etc, then we don't really have a choice but to accept it as historical fact. I know this doesn't really answer the question, and this totally dumbs down the argument, but it nonetheless gives us something to ponder: can God, who created something out of nothing, who rose again after death, who managed to fit all the animals of the world into a big boat, and made a donkey talk, etc, ....could he not keep a dude alive in a whale for a few days? Perhaps this is a perfect example of "does it matter if its fact, or allegory?". Does believing it as fact or allegory effect ones salvation? For some reason I don't have nearly as difficult a time accepting this one as I do with all the animals aboard "Noah's Ark"!
ReplyDeletePlease correct me if I'm wrong, but Christ seemed to treat the Old Testament like an outdated legalistic document that needs revision. He would use the OT stories that the jews knew to explain himself to them (Matthew 12:40,41). Check out that verse. The historical verification of Jonah's whale belly experience was not the point nor does it's factuality matter. What mattered was that the Jews were familiar with such a story and this fact made a bridge for Jesus to beautifully articulate how his own departure would unfold.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous - Shrek has a talking donkey friend as well, but I'm not sure that he's kept anyone alive in a whale's belly yet. =]
thanks for your thoughts Anonymous and Brian. Jesus' attitude toward the OT, according to some of his critics at least, was one that was very cavalier and reading bits of his sermon on the mount you can see why (Matt 5-7). Paul, also, wrote about the OT in a way that some within the Jewish community were very offended by (read Galatians). While Jesus and Paul both affirmed the divinely inspired status of the OT, both believed in its fulfillment/completion in Jesus' life, death and resurrection.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the historical aspect of some of the OT stories, I will do some digging to see what Jesus' Jewish contemporaries thought about the historical value of Jonah, Noah etc... It will help to give us something to compare with the NT writers and see if there are any differences/similiarities in terms of their attitude towards these stories. In other words, I will be interesting to see whether or not it mattered to the Jewish community (there were lots of different Jewish communities in Jesus' day so there will likely be diversity in this) if these stories actually happened or if they were just important myths that helped shape their corporate identity, formed their sense of ethics, etc...