On this Maundy Thursday (not to be confused with Thirsty Monday), I've decided to take a look at an idea that I've seen proposed occasionally, which is that the stories in the Bible must be at least mostly true, because they seem like they COULD be true. With David, for instance, the ambivalent way in which he's portrayed has led to some suggestions that his story is pretty accurate, because why would Jewish historians portray their legendary founding king in a negative light unless they didn't have the choice? While I do find this idea compelling, aren't a lot of founding heroes pretty jerky sometimes? I'm not sure anyone nowadays believes Hercules was an actual historical figure, and he was said to have murdered his own kids. And not only was he worshipped as a god, but he got his own Disney movie. Giving characters flaws is part of being a good writer, isn't it?
That said, I do find the idea of the stories in the Bible being at least based on true events to be an interesting one. Continuing with King David, remember how God told him to have a census, and then punished him by killing a bunch of his subjects with a plague after he actually did it? When the story is retold in Chronicles, the author seems to have tried to make the story a little less bizarre by saying it was Satan who ordered the census in the first place, but it's still a pretty weird tale. I've heard it proposed, however, that the story could have originated because the census takers were actually CARRYING the plague, allowing to spread throughout the kingdom. So the story would be basically true, but a supernatural element would have been added to explain something that wasn't understood at the time.
I find it a little silly that people will use whatever evidence they can find that mentions Biblical figures, and try to use that as proof that the Bible is accurate. The mere fact that King David and Jesus of Nazareth were real people doesn't automatically mean all the stuff about Goliath and the resurrection were also true. (In fact, even the Bible itself contradicts the David and Goliath story.) I know there are some archaeologists who are determined to find support for the Bible due to their own religious beliefs. But in a way, even secular historians probably want at least the less crazy parts of the Bible to be true, because that's really all we have to describe much of the history of Israel. Maybe the stuff about Solomon being the wisest, richest guy in the world was exaggerated, but if Solomon hadn't even been a real person, that leaves a gap in the historical record. Besides, if we found the Ark of the Covenant, then we could melt some Nazis!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
