Biblical Writings as Historical Fiction

[SallyF]

Historical fiction is defined as movies and novels in which a story is made up but is set in the past and sometimes borrows true characteristics of the time period in which it is set. https://www.yourdictionary.com/historical-fiction

Historical Fiction:
the genre of literature, film, etc., comprising narratives that take place in the past and are characterized chiefly by an imaginative reconstruction of historical events and personages. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/historical-fiction

The genre of historical fiction in the field of children’s literature
includes stories that are written to portray a time period or
convey information about a specific time period or an historical
event. Usually the event or time period is about 30 years in the
past. http://www.readwritethink.org/files/res ... onDefn.pdf

We successfully determined in an earlier thread that biblical writings can often safely be shown to fit definitions of fantasy fiction.

Can we determine that biblical writings can also be shown to fit definitions of historical fiction ...?

(For purposes of this topic, the definitions off historical fiction given above may mean just whatever we choose them to mean ... and no further explanation is necessary.)

[Difflugia]

At a minimum, the stories of Samson (Judges 13-16), Ruth, and Esther are all historical fiction.

[SallyF]

At a minimum, the stories of Samson (Judges 13-16), Ruth, and Esther are all historical fiction.

Thank you …

We can safely pop the biblical book of Judith in that very same anthology.

[JehovahsWitness]

HISORICAL FICTION or HISTORY?

Some suggest the bible should be considered historical fiction of the genre of novels like J K Rowling's "Harry Potter" . The bible differs from Harry Potter and the like in several key areas:

• a) PRESTENTATION Harry Potter was never conceived or presented as anything but fiction the bible is presented and reads as a historical account and this from its earliest conception. The first requirement of historical writing is to claim to be historical writing or at the very least to not have the author present the work as a work of fiction.
  
  b) CHARACTERS All the central characters in HP are fictional whereas the bible centers on real historical individuals many of which have been proven to have actually have existed.
  
  c) LOCATIONS While London ( one of the backdrops of the Harry Potter novels), is of course a real city, by far the majority of locations, towns & villages, schools, taverns, etc in Harry Potter are fictional. By contrast all of the locations, towns, villages in the bible are real the majority of which have been proven to be such.
  
  d) DETAIL The sheer volume of provable detail in the bible lifts it out of the realms of "historical fiction" or a fantasy novel. The bible mentions hundreds of locations, peoples, nations, towns and villages, trade routes, tribes kingdoms, rulers, wars and conflicts, and is full of cultural detail (languages, currency, religions, customs, animals plants native to given regions... etc ) that have been proven to be accurate. Fiction and mythology is traditionally full of imagined creatures and unheard of cultures, customs, peoples and languages.
  
  d) DATES Mythology and fiction is generally non-specific when it comes to dating events ("Once upon a time, in a land far far away"...) or date events in relation to other non-provable events. While the Harry Potter novels are set in the 1990's Britain, characteristic of fiction no facts are presented by which a historian can verify specific events. The bible on the other hand is full of specific detail that enables us to identify when many of the events took place and these events more often than not, line up with archeological findings and recorded secular history.

CONCLUSION While labelling the bible as "a history book" is somewhat misleading, as this gives the impression its primary focus is on the recording of historical detail, the comparison of the bible to historical or fantasy fiction like "Harry Potter" is a gross misrepresentation of its contents. The bible is a book of spiritual instruction but it has much of its contents are framed in accurate historical realities.


JW

RELATED POSTS

Should the bible be classified as fantasy fiction?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 154#997154

Is the bible a history book?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 473#800473

Were the gospel writers historians?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 495#987495

[polonius]

JW posted:

(post) d) DETAIL The sheer volume of provable detail in the bible lifts it out of the realms of "historical fiction" or a fantasy novel. The bible mentions hundreds of locations, peoples, nations, towns and villages, trade routes, tribes kingdoms, rulers, wars and conflicts, and is full of cultural detail (languages, currency, religions, customs, animals plants native to given regions... etc ) that have been proven to be accurate. Fiction and mythology is traditionally full of imagined creatures and unheard of cultures, customs, peoples and languages. (post)

RESPONSE: Lots of different writers begets lots of details!

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 4 by JehovahsWitness]

Gone with the Wind mentions many people, places and events from the real world. Does that make the story true -- or qualify it as non-fiction?

[Red Wolf]

What I find disturbing about the gospels is that the story is told by a narrator. Nothing in the gospels is written from a first person point of view. If this story were real and not fiction I would have expected several people close to Jesus to have written about their personal experiences with Jesus. But we have nothing.

[Difflugia]

HISORICAL FICTION or HISTORY?

Historical fiction.

Some suggest the bible should be considered historical fiction of the genre of novels like J K Rowling's "Harry Potter".

Harry Potter isn't historical fiction. Shogun, Johnny Tremain, and A Tale of Two Cities are historical fiction.

The bible differs from Harry Potter and the like in several key areas:

a) PRESTENTATION Harry Potter was never conceived or presented as anything but fiction the bible is presented and reads as a historical account and this from its earliest conception. The first requirement of historical writing is to claim to be historical writing or at the very least to not have the author present the work as a work of fiction.

This is questionable at best. Though several of the works now accepted as fictional were considered to be historical during the late Second Temple period, there's no reason to think they were originally presented as historical. Even if you want to claim that a lack of author attestation means we should assume historicity without other evidence, all of the books mentioned show enough evidence of being fictional to overcome a simple benefit of the doubt.

b) CHARACTERS All the central characters in HP are fictional whereas the bible centers on real historical individuals many of which have been proven to have actually have existed.

Samson's name is a variant of the Babylonian solar god "Shamash." "Delilah" means "weakening" or "languishing."

Naomi's sons were named "Sickly" and "Wasted," because they died young. Ruth's sister-in-law was named "Back-of-the-neck" because she "turned her neck" to Naomi.

The characters in Esther were named after Persian/Elamite deities (International Critical Commentary: Esther, pp. 66-71):

• Mordecai = Marduk
• Esther = Ishtar
• Vashti = Mashti
• Haman = Humman

Compare Harry Potter's Professor Lupin (a werewolf) and Sirius Black (a shapeshifting dog).

c) LOCATIONS While London ( one of the backdrops of the Harry Potter novels), is of course a real city, by far the majority of locations, towns & villages, schools, taverns, etc in Harry Potter are fictional. By contrast all of the locations, towns, villages in the bible are real the majority of which have been proven to be such.

Even if we take your assertion that all of the biblical locations are real, books that are properly historical fiction also take place in real towns and cities, most of which have been proven to be real. Consider The Scarlet Letter's description of Boston and historical sites within it or the setting of The Three Musketeers that we now know to be historical, France.

d) DETAIL The sheer volume of provable detail in the bible lifts it out of the realms of "historical fiction" or a fantasy novel. The bible mentions hundreds of locations, peoples, nations, towns and villages, trade routes, tribes kingdoms, rulers, wars and conflicts, and is full of cultural detail (languages, currency, religions, customs, animals plants native to given regions... etc ) that have been proven to be accurate. Fiction and mythology is traditionally full of imagined creatures and unheard of cultures, customs, peoples and languages.

Again, historical verisimilitude is the hallmark of good historical fiction. On the other hand, does the corollary hold true, that details proven to be ahistorical mean that the work is fiction? From the Esther commentary referenced above (p. 71):

Some of the statements of this book are contradicted by the Greek historians. For instance, during the period between the 7th and the 12th year (2:16, 3:7) Xerxes' queen was not Esther but Amestris (Her. vii. 114; ix. 112). Since Scaliger's identification of Ahasuerus with Xerxes it has been customary to identify Esther with Amestris, but this is phonetically impossible. We know also from Her. vii. 61; Ctesias, 38b, that Amestris was not a Jewess, but the daughter of a Persian general, and that she married Xerxes long before the action of this book begins. The suggestion of Sayce, that Esther was not the actual queen, but only a royal favourite, is contrary to the statement of 2:17.

As for Judith, according to The New Oxford Annotated Bible:

The book's fictional nature is evident from its blending of history and fiction, beginning in the very first verse and is too prevalent thereafter to be considered mere historical mistake.

d) DATES Mythology and fiction is generally non-specific when it comes to dating events ("Once upon a time, in a land far far away"...) or date events in relation to other non-provable events. While the Harry Potter novels are set in the 1990's Britain, characteristic of fiction no facts are presented by which a historian can verify specific events. The bible on the other hand is full of specific detail that enables us to identify when many of the events took place and these events more often than not, line up with archeological findings and recorded secular history.

Modern historical fiction has a mix of specific and non-specific dating, just like the Bible.

• War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy — "It was in July, 1805..."
• The Godfather by Mario Puzo — "All of these people and many others received engraved invitations to the wedding of Miss Constanzia Corleone, to be celebrated on the last Saturday in August 1945."
• To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee — "There is a tendency in this year of grace, 1935, for certain people to use this phrase out of context, to satisfy all conditions."
• Kidnapped by Robert Louis Stevenson — "I will begin the story of my adventures with a certain morning early in the month of June, the year of grace 1751,"

• Ruth — "In the days when the judges ruled there was a famine in the land..."
• Esther — "Now in the days of Ahasuerus, the Ahasuerus who reigned from India to Ethiopia over 127 provinces..."
• Judith — "It was the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh. In those days Arphaxad ruled over the Medes in Ecbatana."

CONCLUSION While labelling the bible as "a history book" is somewhat misleading, as this gives the impression its primary focus is on the recording of historical detail, the comparison of the bible to historical or fantasy fiction like "Harry Potter" is a gross misrepresentation of its contents. The bible is a book of spiritual instruction but it has much of its contents are framed in accurate historical realities.

CONCLUSION While some historical details of the Bible are accurate enough to offer an immersive atmosphere with what might be called "local color," too many biblical details are historically dubious or outright falsified to suggest that the Bible is historically accurate overall.

[SallyF]

Description
Good Women Behaving Badly

A spiteful boss, a defiant employee, a manipulative mother, a desperate housewife, an envious sister…honey, we know these women. We’ve lived with them, worked with them, or caught a glimpse of them in our mirrors.

Now let’s take a look at their ancient counterparts in Scripture: Sarah mistreated her maidservant, Hagar despised her mistress, Rebekah manipulated her son, Leah claimed her sister’s husband, and Rachel envied her fertile sister.

They were far from evil, but hardly perfect. Mostly good, yet slightly bad. In other words, these matriarchal mamas look a lot like us.

“A Slightly Bad Girl is simply this: a woman unwilling to fully submit to God. We love him, serve him, and worship him, yet we find it difficult to trust him completely, to accept his plan for our lives, to rest in his sovereignty.� —from Slightly Bad Girls of the Bible https://www.tatteredcover.com/book/9780 ... eId=000266

----------------------------------------------------

This book COULD be regarded as "scripture".

It's how "scripture" develops.

It's takes familiar, base material - that may or may not be fully historical in itself - mentions "God" a few times, and frolics off into stories imagined by the imaginative author.

But it mentions "God".

And it says what people WANT it to say about "God" and such ...

So …

After everyone who actually KNEW the author is long dead …

New generations will accept the historical fiction as "scripture".

And they will insist to future generations that it IS "scripture".

And the brainwashing known as "faith" will keep them convinced …

And defending the historical fiction as "scripture" …

To the point of absurdity.

In my experience and opinion.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 8 by Difflugia]

How in your opinion does one distinguish between a book that is historical fiction and a book that should not be thus classified? And how do you proposing proving that a book has been thus misassigned?


JW