The Bible and Symbolism
There is so much apparent symbolism and so many anthropomorphism’s in the Bible that no one in their right mind should reasonably accept it all as literal—not without a whole lot of indoctrination. Yet, many Christians continue to read what is obviously symbolic in exactly that way. I have found this to be true with Mormons as well. Almost all are willing to accept some small amount of poetry and symbolism, but, are generally suspicious of reading the Bible as anything other than 100% true. For Mormons this is peculiar, since they believe that the Bible was wrongly translated and is inferior to the Book of Mormon. However, they also believe that once you correct for its errors through the divinely revealed truth of the Book of Mormon, everything else is absolutely correct. Mormon's tend to read the Bible in the same way Christians read the Old Testament, which is, in the light of the New. In their case the Book of Mormon provides the lens for understanding the older texts, a third Testament that provides insight for both the Old and New Testaments.
Both Mormons and Evangelicals in that regard share the same assumption, that it is primarily the work of God through the Holy Spirit that is the source of truth, the mind alone cannot be trusted. This, of course, assumes that there is some objective measure for determining when inspiration is of the divine kind as opposed the the purely rational kind. How do they determine that it is the mind alone at work when interpreting doctrine? Most do by determining that it isn't consistent with their experience and interpretation! That there is a glaring circularity to the logic of both Mormon and Evangelicals seems not to matter. Faith is the substance of relationship, reason and study are secondary considerations.
Paul is frequently quoted when justification for faith, feeling or experience need the necessary support in order to carry the day. “The wisdom of the wise is as foolishness to God” has given license to elevate foolishness to the standard of doctrine. Often ignoring that Paul was a highly literate man in a largely illiterate culture—one that used the wisdom of the Greeks, as well as his own rich Jewish tradition to make a logical case for both Jew and Gentile regarding Jesus as the Christ. For the Jew, Paul argues for Jesus' as Messiah in the context of the Hebrew Bible, his Bible, as well that of Jesus' and the twelve. He does so quoting the Greek translation (the Septuagint) as opposed to the Masoretic text (the Old Testament written in Hebrew). For the gentiles, Paul uses a form of Greek Socratic argumentation. In both instances Paul's presentation is thoroughly rooted in reason, not primarily an appeal to the supernatural.
The Book of Acts by comparison gives us a supernatural version of Paul's conversion, from a persecutor of the early church to staunch believer. Paul's own conversion testimony in Galatians, however, is a good deal less dramatic, and in areas, contradictory of the Luke's synopsis of the growth of the early Jesus movement.
None of this should be surprising, not in the light of how ancient people wrote history. They didn't write history the way a modern historian would, with a reiteration of chronological events, but, often, according to categories; Jesus as the good shepherd, Jesus the healer, Jesus the suffering servant, told out of order, more like a Quentin Tarantino movie than a modern history. It was the meaning of things explained, often using allegory and symbolism to convey a deeper understanding of an event that was the preferred method, much in the way a modern evangelist would do today. Paul's testimony in Galatians represents the unvarnished truth, Luke's version, the event explained, rich in metaphorical imagery, the spiritual subtext, beneath the actual historical context.
Another example would be the ten plagues of Egypt from the story of the exodus. Below are side by side examples of the Bible's interpretation of events and a scientific explanation.
Both Mormons and Evangelicals in that regard share the same assumption, that it is primarily the work of God through the Holy Spirit that is the source of truth, the mind alone cannot be trusted. This, of course, assumes that there is some objective measure for determining when inspiration is of the divine kind as opposed the the purely rational kind. How do they determine that it is the mind alone at work when interpreting doctrine? Most do by determining that it isn't consistent with their experience and interpretation! That there is a glaring circularity to the logic of both Mormon and Evangelicals seems not to matter. Faith is the substance of relationship, reason and study are secondary considerations.
Paul is frequently quoted when justification for faith, feeling or experience need the necessary support in order to carry the day. “The wisdom of the wise is as foolishness to God” has given license to elevate foolishness to the standard of doctrine. Often ignoring that Paul was a highly literate man in a largely illiterate culture—one that used the wisdom of the Greeks, as well as his own rich Jewish tradition to make a logical case for both Jew and Gentile regarding Jesus as the Christ. For the Jew, Paul argues for Jesus' as Messiah in the context of the Hebrew Bible, his Bible, as well that of Jesus' and the twelve. He does so quoting the Greek translation (the Septuagint) as opposed to the Masoretic text (the Old Testament written in Hebrew). For the gentiles, Paul uses a form of Greek Socratic argumentation. In both instances Paul's presentation is thoroughly rooted in reason, not primarily an appeal to the supernatural.
The Book of Acts by comparison gives us a supernatural version of Paul's conversion, from a persecutor of the early church to staunch believer. Paul's own conversion testimony in Galatians, however, is a good deal less dramatic, and in areas, contradictory of the Luke's synopsis of the growth of the early Jesus movement.
None of this should be surprising, not in the light of how ancient people wrote history. They didn't write history the way a modern historian would, with a reiteration of chronological events, but, often, according to categories; Jesus as the good shepherd, Jesus the healer, Jesus the suffering servant, told out of order, more like a Quentin Tarantino movie than a modern history. It was the meaning of things explained, often using allegory and symbolism to convey a deeper understanding of an event that was the preferred method, much in the way a modern evangelist would do today. Paul's testimony in Galatians represents the unvarnished truth, Luke's version, the event explained, rich in metaphorical imagery, the spiritual subtext, beneath the actual historical context.
Another example would be the ten plagues of Egypt from the story of the exodus. Below are side by side examples of the Bible's interpretation of events and a scientific explanation.
|
The Ten Plagues of Egypt
1. Water to Blood And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and that there may be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels of stone. 2. Frogs And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs:8:3 And the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly, which shall go up and come into thine house, and into thy bedchamber, and upon thy bed, and into the house of thy servants, and upon thy people, and into thine ovens, and into thy kneading troughs: And the frogs shall come up both on thee, and upon thy people, and upon all thy servants. 3. Gnats or Lice And the LORD said unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy rod, and smite the dust of the land, that it may become lice throughout all the land of Egypt. 4. Flies Else, if thou wilt not let my people go, behold, I will send swarms of flies upon thee, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people, and into thy houses: and the houses of the Egyptians shall be full of swarms of flies, and also the ground whereon they are. 5. Livestock diseased Behold, the hand of the LORD is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen, and upon the sheep: there shall be a very grievous murrain. 6. Boils And the LORD said unto Moses and unto Aaron, Take to you handfuls of ashes of the furnace, and let Moses sprinkle it toward the heaven in the sight of Pharaoh.9:9 And it shall become small dust in all the land of Egypt, and shall be a boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon beast, throughout all the land of Egypt. 7. Thunder and Hail Behold, tomorrow about this time I will cause it to rain a very grievous hail, such as hath not been in Egypt since the foundation there of even until now. 8. Locusts Else, if thou refuse to let my people go, behold, to morrow will I bring the locusts into thy coast:10:5 And they shall cover the face of the earth, that one cannot be able to see the earth: and they shall eat the residue of that which is escaped, which remaineth unto you from the hail, and shall eat every tree which groweth for you out of the fie 9. Darkness And the LORD said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand toward heaven, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even darkness which may be felt.10:22 And Moses stretched forth his hand toward heaven; and there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt three days 10. Death of the Firstborn And Moses said, Thus saith the LORD, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:11:5 And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts. |
The Ten Plagues of Egypt Explained
1. Water to Blood The Plagues happened at the same time as a massive volcano eruption. The volcano Santorini sent ash in to the air effecting the surrounding area. The ash is found in Cairo and the Nile River, proven by testing the composition of the ash. This volcanic eruption happened between 1500-1650 BC while the Plagues happened between 1400-1550 BC. So it fits there. 2. Frogs 1st Plague. River ran red "LIKE" blood. But there is a common algae plume called the Red Tide. This makes the river, or any water, look red like blood. Why did this happen? The ash changes the PH level of the river allowing the algae to bloom. 3. Gnats or Lice 2nd Plague. Frogs. The algae is killing fish. Fish eat frog eggs. No fish, record number of frogs. Frogs can't live in polluted water and so leave the river 4. Flies 3rd and 4th Plague. Lice and flies. The translation can actually be lice, fleas, gnats, or midges. But you have river full of dead fish, and now dead frogs. This brings the insects of the 3rd and 4th Plague. 5. Livestock diseased 5th Plague. Pestilence. Flies, dead frogs, dead fish create a perfect breeding ground for disease. 6. Boils Plague. Boils. Certain types of flies that bite can leave behind boils. The bites get infected, they turn in to boils. 7. Thunder and Hail Plague. Fire and Hail. Ash in the air causes a mixture of ash and water. The ash, very high in the air, causes the water to freeze creating hail and not rain. The fire? There is an amazing picture in Nat. Geo. During a volcanic eruption Chemicals in the ash makes red lightning. So fire in the sky, and hail. 8. Locusts Locusts. Locusts come about when the ground is very damp. They bury their eggs in the sand about 4-6 inches. After record amount of hail the ground would be very wet allowing the locusts to form. 9. Darkness 9th Plague. Darkness. Ash in the air. After am eruption in 1815 there was darkness for 600 kilometers. After Krakatoa it was dark for even farther for days. 10. Death of the Firstborn 10th Plague. Death of First born. In Egypt the first born was king. They would be the one to lead the family after the father died. When food was scarce the first born ate first and some times was the only one to eat. After locusts ate every thing there was only grain locked in vaults in case of famine. The hail got it wet, locust feces, made it moldy. If only the first born ate, they were the only ones killed by moldy grain. The mold could also effect only the top layer of grain leaving the grain underneath edible. The people at the lowest level of Egyptian culture ate last, leaving them unharmed. This would represent the social standing of the Hebrew people. |
None of this disproves the Bible, quite the contrary, it proves that the Biblical narrative is likely rooted in a real historical event. What is different, is the explanation, which shouldn't be surprising since the Hebrews, as well as the Egyptians, were not scientific cultures. In fact science as we understand it, much like modern notions of history, wouldn't exist for another two thousand plus years.
People have always used the available knowledge of their time to explain events in a way that would have made sense to them. I'm absolutely sure that this is no less true today than it was in ancient times. As our knowledge increases and we refine our methods with new methodologies, our existing scientific age will begin to seem archaic. That won't mean, however, that what we now believe will become irrelevant. It will be the basis for everything that follows, just as we still learn from the great truths of our predecessors. If they had been given divine insight into the method used, explained in a modern scientific language, it would have been completely incoherent to those listening or reading. Instead, the language is a powerfully symbolic form of divinely inspired mixture of ancient history and preaching. Exactly what modern Pastors do every Sunday, in churches all over the world.
Ancient people, in particular the Jews, didn't believe in a natural World and a separate supernatural one. God and his creation were seen as fluid. God's Kingdom was both heaven and earth, Jerusalem was his earthly kingdom, the Hebrews were his people, and the Temple of Solomon was the connection between heaven and earth, the place where God's spirit resided, it replaced the Ark of the Covenant, the Sukkah.
After the destruction of Solomon's Temple by the Babylonians in 587 BC, it's rebuilding and final destruction by the Romans in 70 A.D. the early Christians, in accordance with Jesus' teaching began to see the believer as the dwelling place of God. The legalistic Pharisees' and their followers were left without any means of atoning for sin. Without a Temple their was no place to offer sacrifice, leaving only the sacrifice that Jesus offered. That was the language of the Jews and Christians, rife with symbolism, intended to teach, not a legalistic doctrine, but, a deeper truth with an eternal message.
Mark Magula
People have always used the available knowledge of their time to explain events in a way that would have made sense to them. I'm absolutely sure that this is no less true today than it was in ancient times. As our knowledge increases and we refine our methods with new methodologies, our existing scientific age will begin to seem archaic. That won't mean, however, that what we now believe will become irrelevant. It will be the basis for everything that follows, just as we still learn from the great truths of our predecessors. If they had been given divine insight into the method used, explained in a modern scientific language, it would have been completely incoherent to those listening or reading. Instead, the language is a powerfully symbolic form of divinely inspired mixture of ancient history and preaching. Exactly what modern Pastors do every Sunday, in churches all over the world.
Ancient people, in particular the Jews, didn't believe in a natural World and a separate supernatural one. God and his creation were seen as fluid. God's Kingdom was both heaven and earth, Jerusalem was his earthly kingdom, the Hebrews were his people, and the Temple of Solomon was the connection between heaven and earth, the place where God's spirit resided, it replaced the Ark of the Covenant, the Sukkah.
After the destruction of Solomon's Temple by the Babylonians in 587 BC, it's rebuilding and final destruction by the Romans in 70 A.D. the early Christians, in accordance with Jesus' teaching began to see the believer as the dwelling place of God. The legalistic Pharisees' and their followers were left without any means of atoning for sin. Without a Temple their was no place to offer sacrifice, leaving only the sacrifice that Jesus offered. That was the language of the Jews and Christians, rife with symbolism, intended to teach, not a legalistic doctrine, but, a deeper truth with an eternal message.
Mark Magula