Agnostic.com

4 2

The Bible was made up over a number of centuries by many different editors using multiple sources. In short it is not a book but an album or scrape book of clippings, some of which may have come from high literature, but certainly not all of it, and I would say most of it did not. But in those days writing it down would have meant using professional scribes, who if not educated in the modern sense were at least probably quite good at their jobs, or they would not have made a living, and since it was recopied and edited many time some of those in the line would by chance alone be very good.

This means that, as many apologists love to point out, it seems to be written in very good Hebrew and Greek, therefore they conclude it is at least high literature even if not literal truth. But does style alone make great literature ?

Fernapple 9 May 18
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

4 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Besides that, most of the stories that eventually were written down and recorded began life as a oral tradition. Past from person to person verbally.

The problem with relying on oral tradition is that each teller imparts a different version with their telling, and even with each individual telling. So when it finally gets written down, there no telling how many iterations and changes has occurred.

To clarify one point, most of the oral iterations maintain the essence of the story and lesson intended, only small specifics vary which are understood and accepted by the participants of the time. But 2000 years later, the context is not the same and those small idiosyncrasies can take on new meanings as read and understood by the new audience. Many parables and lessons pertain to a specific context and do not always translate correctly going forward.

1

One meaning of literature is writing worthy of being remembered. Another is 'writings in which expression and form, in connection with ideas of permanent and universal interest, are characteristic or essential features, as poetry, novels, history, biography, and essays'. I think that means well-written. I see this combination of style and content throughout the Bible from the psalms, Solomon's temple inauguration speech (2 Chronicles Chapter 6) and some letters of Paul, among other things. I don't know what the criteria is to differentiate between high and low literature.

I think that stories that get passed down however, tend to gets passed down because they have populist appeal, which often sadly mean that they appeal to our base natures. This is what I posted to Anonyschm below.
Is it high or good literature ? I thought it would be good to compare it with some headlines culled from the trash gutter press.

Such as: “ Pimp kicked prostitute even when he found her dead.” “ Executive head of syndicate arranged death of his second, after spying on his beautiful wife in the bath.” “Mad general orders even animals killed a stricken city falls.” “Elderly couple treated surrogate mother as slave, then abandoned her when they decided they did not want baby.” “Young mother claims she is still a virgin.”

Oh sorry that is my mistake, wrong list, those are the ones I got from the bible.

0

It is what I have always described as a collection of fables and tales....rather similar in nature to The Arabian Nights...or One Thousand and One Nights as it is more correctly named. They are a collection of fables, folklore and morality stories which were written in Arabic and were collected from all over the Middle East during the Islamic Golden Age. Sir Richard Burton is credited in first translating them into English between 1705-16. Some of these tales trace their origins back into Persian, Greek, Indian, Jewish, Turkish, as well as Arabic culture. Not too different from how the Bible was compiled and then later translated I should imagine.

Perhaps yes, but I do think that they make a better whole than the bible.

@Fernapple They certainly do...much better, and nobody pretends that they are anything other than fables.

1

I think of it as literature too, not entirely as literal history, but as figurative. Even though apt scribes could write well, that does not guarantee that the collected 'clippings' from many editors over centuries could achieve a standard that would put the Bible in a literary canon, thereby entitling it to be called great or high literature. I agree some of it is great, for one example, Psalms.

Every thing is literature, but is it high or good literature. I thought it would be good to compare it with some headlines culled from the trash gutter press.

Such as: “ Pimp kicked prostitute even when he found her dead.” “ Executive head of syndicate arranged death of his second, after spying on his beautiful wife in the bath.” “Mad general orders even animals killed a stricken city falls.” “Elderly couple treated surrogate mother as slave, then abandoned her when they decided they did not want baby.” “Young mother claims she is still a virgin.”

Oh sorry that is my mistake, wrong list, those are the ones I got from the bible.

@Fernapple Sensational in an American 'National Enquirer' type of way.

@AnonySchmoose Don't know the Enquirer of course but we wou;ld call them Red Tops.

@Fernapple 'National Enquirer' prints a lot of salacious, concocted scandals. The magazine is frequently sued by celebrities.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:348545
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.