Reply #81: The day has arrived!

[UncleSepp]

:-) At least, in some places. I agree totally that treating any religious text as myth is a good thing - but I also would say that there are many, many myths that need to be treated as myths, too. Myth is important! I think we get sloppy with language and equate myth, fiction, and lies. We get sloppy, too, when we set up myth and history as opposites.

A myth is a story that is intended to be interpreted for deeper meaning. History is an account of events first. It will ultimately be interpreted for meaning, but that's not why the history is told. The factual truth of history is essential to its nature, as is its objectivity. The factual truth of a myth is interesting but doesn't have much bearing on what can be learned from the story. Factual truth isn't what myths teach well.

Think of they myth of Narcissus. Does it actually matter whether Narcissus was real and actually turned into a flower? No, that part's not the essential truth of the myth. The essential truth of the myth is that there are people who are so self-absorbed that they become stuck, no longer able to function as complete human beings, no longer able to move away from their own shaky reflections. They lose their ability to change. Whether anything in the story is factually accurate does not change the essential truth.

Think of a historical event, like the moon landing. Does it actually matter whether Neil Armstrong walked on the moon? Of course! A real moon landing tells one story, and a fake one tells an entirely different kind of story. The greater truth to be extracted from this history changes with the facts. Does national competition lead to greater heights, or depths? Does it lead to exploration and discovery, or depraved deception?

The complication of this is that history becomes myth over time. The interpretations of historical events influence their telling, until the telling is set and the factual accuracy gives way in importance to the agreed meaning. A person telling the story of a faked moon landing is telling a myth already, not because it isn't true, but because the story they tell is intended to be a caution against believing everything that is presented as fact. A person telling the story of how the Americans went to the moon and left their flag may still be telling a myth, even if all the facts are correct, if the story they tell is intended to support the uniqueness of the American pioneer spirit.

Myth has more power than history. For this reason, I also think that treating religious texts as mythology is necessary, not just as a way to open minds to other mythologies, but to deepen religious texts from a brittle list of literal facts to a resilient, living set of teaching stories.

:-) This is great fun!