Wednesday, 7 March 2012

The Bible, stories and history

Another problem that comes to mind when we talk about stories and the Bible, is the relationship between story and history. We already dealt with the fact that story does not equal fiction. Aren’t we weakening the historicity of the Bible by referring to those parts that have traditionally being viewed as historical truth by referring to it as story? Can story and history go together especially if we believe that our faith is grounded in historical truth?
Henry (1987, p. 19) warns that:
The narrative approach therefore seems not fully befitting the historic Christian faith. . . . One discerns here an enchantment with the affective, a flight from history to the perspectival that enjoins no universal truth-claims, a reflection of the revolt against reason, a reliance on ‘symbolic truth’ and imagination, and an interest in earthly theatre more than revealed theology.
For him the fact that narratives appeals to the emotive and imaginative goes against the fact that we are dealing with revelation. Revelation is based on historical truth (as we see it from a modernistic worldview) and therefore the whole idea that parts of Scripture may be called ‘story’ or categorised as ‘narratives’ is actually devaluating our faith.
For Merrill (1999, p. 68), however:
The history of the OT is overwhelmingly narrative in expression. From beginning to end the dealings of God with humankind, their response to him, and their interrelationships at both individual and corporate levels appear in story form. [Emphasis Merrill's]
Thus, there need not be a chasm between story and history. Story may be just that, story (as in fiction) but it is also possible to communicate real events by means of a story. Truth told in narrative form does not diminish its factualness. If I tell you my ‘life story’, it is the history of my life in the form of a story. Using literary devises in order to make the story more interesting and to engage others in my story will not take anything away from the truth I’m telling. Tate (2008, p. 105) refer to it as “storicized history”.
Acknowledging that huge parts of both the Old and New Testament are written in story form does not take anything away from its historicity. Interpreting these text from a literary point of view does not take away anything of the truth it communicates. 

Henry, C. F. H. (1987). Narrative Theology: An Evangelical Appraisal. Trinity Journal, 8(1), 3–19.
Tate, W. R. (2008). Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach. Hendrickson Pub.
Merrill, E. H. (1999). Old Testament History: A Theological perspective. In, VanGemeren, W. A. (Ed.). Old Testament History: A Theological Perspective, in: A guide to Old Testament theology and exegesis: an introductory articles from the New International dictionary of Old Testament theology and exegesis. Grand Rapids  Mich.: Zondervan.

No comments:

Post a Comment