Monday, April 9, 2012

"Factual History" vs. "Myth"

I am interested in whether the things in the scriptures actually happened - but much more as an academic exercise than as a way to accept or reject them. I am FAR more interested in what I can learn from historical accounts than I am about the exact accuracy of those accounts, especially since I believe we can learn more about people from learning their myths (their ideals and what they envisioned as their ultimate relationship to each other and deity) than from most recitations of the actions of their daily lives.

"Factual History", after all, until very recently, is the story of a few leaders and their impact on people - not the story of the people themselves. "Myth", in many ways, is the story of the people - and myth always is a combination of the factual and the imagined. (and I don't mean "true and false" when I say "factual and imagined".)


Anonymous said...

This is amazing Ray,I love it. I've been trying to frame this in my poor addled brain for some time now. It bridges the idea of the literal and the figurative for me too. It helps me understand why I am OK about stuff that seems to bother others,and which I think I should be bothered about too.

I also am interested by the myths of others and what that may tell me about what was important to them,and what they wanted to tell their children and leave to the future. It's like looking at renaissance paintings, stuff may or may not have looked like that,but what does it tell us about the values of the people that painted it?

The stories that we tell each other about ourselves, about what we want the world to be.

Useful and beautiful. I will be using this to inform my thinking in my family.

Papa D said...

I really like how you worded your comment, Anonymous. Thanks!