Omniscient Narrator

[Zzyzx]

.
Omniscient Narrator is a literary device used in fiction and fantasy writing, in which the narrator purports to know the thoughts of characters and their actions when alone or unobserved.

This device cannot be used in non-fiction since humans are not omniscient – and only very amateurish and insincere writers even attempt its use in what they claim is non-fiction.

If two people are alone, the narrator cannot quote verbatim what they say or describe what they do (unless s/he is one of the two). The closest a non-fiction writer can come is to relay what one or both characters claimed afterward what was said or done.

For instance in Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.�
10 Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’ �

Was there an audience / someone to observe and record what was done and said?

The best a non-fiction writer who did not pretend to be omniscient could say is “Satan (or Jesus) told me what was done and said.�

What are other examples of biblical fiction using omniscient narrator? Genesis describing what God said and did before humans were created? Noah conversations with God – who heard and recorded what was said? Other examples?

Does biblical use of omniscient narrator indicate that it is NOT non-fiction? If so, why? If not, why?

[Zzyzx]

.
If someone writes as though they know thoughts and solo actions of characters – or writes as though they witnessed conversations and events that they did not, they are deceiving readers. Why would they risk their credibility doing so? Some possibilities:

1) They consider their audience too naive and gullible to detect (or care about) the deception
2) They ‘lay it on thick and heavy’, often including appeals to authority in effort to appear credible
3) They consider their ‘theological message’ to be more important than accurate information

[marco]

.
If someone writes as though they know thoughts and solo actions of characters – or writes as though they witnessed conversations and events that they did not, they are deceiving readers. Why would they risk their credibility doing so? Some possibilities:

1) They consider their audience too naive and gullible to detect (or care about) the deception
2) They ‘lay it on thick and heavy’, often including appeals to authority in effort to appear credible
3) They consider their ‘theological message’ to be more important than accurate information

Paul obviously thought he could penetrate the mind of God and his writings are just God's thoughts expressed in Paul's splendid prose.

Matthew loved a miracle and whenever he had the chance he invented, as if he were actually present on the scene. He would cleverly take some quotation from Scripture, adjust it, and make it fit the scene he was describing as if he were an eye-witness.
So (3) would apply.

To be fair the authors probably thought God had touched them in some way. They then had insights not given to ordinary mortals.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Does biblical use of omniscient narrator indicate that it is NOT non-fiction? If so, why? If not, why?

The narration does not indicate that the material in the bible is fiction... and you yourself touched upon the answer as to why not:


The author was told about content.

Perhaps by an eyewitness (or perhaps the author was an eyewitness to the events being described). Or perhaps the author was even told about the content by the participant in the story. Or, in the case of inspired text, the author would have received the content in the spirit (from the Spirit and/or from an angel). As well, an account given by an eyewitness (or participant) could have been passed down through others.


"Luke" is an example of a person who wrote according to the testimony of others (as handed down by those who were eyewitnesses).

"Revelation" is an example of an inspired scripture, given to the author while he was in the spirit, showing him things from the past, present (the author's present), and future.


None of the above indicates that the author was writing fiction. You might not believe the testimonies and accounts and stories, but that does not mean they were written as fiction or even that they are fiction.




Peace again to you!

[SallyF]

And Elohim/God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Quoting the Canaanite Elohim verbatim …?

It's omniscient narrator fiction


The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.

This is the omniscient narrator telling us what will happen when the Genocidal Jesus comes back to the planet the Genocidal Jehovah flooded about 1,500 years previously.

There is no evidence the authors of this fiction were "in the spirit" and in communication with any version of "God" …

Perhaps they were on drugs.

[1213]

...Was there an audience / someone to observe and record what was done and said?
...

I believe Jesus told the story to his disciples. And later it was then written in books.

[Clownboat]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Does biblical use of omniscient narrator indicate that it is NOT non-fiction? If so, why? If not, why?

The narration does not indicate that the material in the bible is fiction... and you yourself touched upon the answer as to why not:


The author was told about content.

Perhaps by an eyewitness (or perhaps the author was an eyewitness to the events being described). Or perhaps the author was even told about the content by the participant in the story. Or, in the case of inspired text, the author would have received the content in the spirit (from the Spirit and/or from an angel). As well, an account given by an eyewitness (or participant) could have been passed down through others.


"Luke" is an example of a person who wrote according to the testimony of others (as handed down by those who were eyewitnesses).

"Revelation" is an example of an inspired scripture, given to the author while he was in the spirit, showing him things from the past, present (the author's present), and future.


None of the above indicates that the author was writing fiction. You might not believe the testimonies and accounts and stories, but that does not mean they were written as fiction or even that they are fiction.




Peace again to you!

Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse is not believable, even if we hear such a thing from an eyewitness. Clearly they were writing fiction.
Can we even present a real winged horse?

Any examples of long dead bodies reanimating for us to examine? "No" you say? Just words penned by men in religious promotional material? No surprise there. Clearly they were writing fiction, no?

Please define 'in the spirit' and let us know how you know that the author of Revelations was in the spirit you claim he was in.

I hope this is not something I have to feel in my heart.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Does biblical use of omniscient narrator indicate that it is NOT non-fiction? If so, why? If not, why?

The narration does not indicate that the material in the bible is fiction... and you yourself touched upon the answer as to why not:


The author was told about content.

Perhaps by an eyewitness (or perhaps the author was an eyewitness to the events being described). Or perhaps the author was even told about the content by the participant in the story. Or, in the case of inspired text, the author would have received the content in the spirit (from the Spirit and/or from an angel). As well, an account given by an eyewitness (or participant) could have been passed down through others.


"Luke" is an example of a person who wrote according to the testimony of others (as handed down by those who were eyewitnesses).

"Revelation" is an example of an inspired scripture, given to the author while he was in the spirit, showing him things from the past, present (the author's present), and future.


None of the above indicates that the author was writing fiction. You might not believe the testimonies and accounts and stories, but that does not mean they were written as fiction or even that they are fiction.




Peace again to you!

Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse is not believable, even if we hear such a thing from an eyewitness. Clearly they were writing fiction.

No, that is not clear. As long as the author believed this to be a true event, the author was clearly not writing fiction.

Whether or not you believe the event actually happened is an entirely different discussion. Perhaps you need to be an author to understand the difference?

Can we even present a real winged horse?

That is irrelevant. Fiction is not defined as "anything that is not proven true". You are also not taking into consideration the possibility of symbolism being used to describe something the author (or even a later scribe) did not understand.

Any examples of long dead bodies reanimating for us to examine? "No" you say? Just words penned by men in religious promotional material? No surprise there. Clearly they were writing fiction, no?

No.

But again this misrepresents or simply misunderstands what it is to be fiction.

Please define 'in the spirit' and let us know how you know that the author of Revelations was in the spirit you claim he was in.

I did not make that claim; the AUTHOR makes that claim.


What the author does not do is claim (or even indicate) that he was writing fiction. The author claims that he experienced and saw and heard the things he wrote about.


You can accept or reject that as you wish, but your choice has no bearing on whether or not the book is fiction.




Peace again to you.

[Menotu]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Not sure you can legitimately use logic, rules, common sense, etc. towards religious writings.
You can, of course, but it won't matter much or make a whole lotta sense.

[SallyF]

fic·​tion | \ ˈfik-shən \
Definition of fiction
1a: something invented by the imagination or feigned
specifically : an invented story
… I'd found out that the story of the ailing son was pure fiction.
— Andrew A. Rooney
b: fictitious literature (such as novels or short stories)
was renowned as a writer of fiction
c: a work of fiction
especially : NOVEL
Her latest work is a fiction set during the Civil War.
2a: an assumption of a possibility as a fact irrespective of the question of its truth
a legal fiction
b: a useful illusion or pretense
it was only a fiction of independence his mother gave him; he was almost totally under her power
— G. A. Wagner
3: the action of feigning or of creating with the imagination
She engaged in fiction to escape painful realities.

Given the utter absence (in "the spirit" or not) of the influence of "God" in the biblical propaganda …

The biblical propaganda fits the above definitions of fiction …

Whether the authors "believe" their stories of global floods and magic foreskins and such or not.

The biblical propaganda also fits definitions of propaganda.

A glimpse of evidence for a global flood or a magic foreskin would dispel doubt.