Theological Truth And Its Container
Posted by Pastoral Musings on June 20th, 2012
Image via Wikipedia
For Christians it is a given that the Bible conveys theological truth. Sometimes the truth is conveyed by a parable, at others by a narrative. Sometimes that truth is contained in a poem or a song. Is it ever conveyed in a myth? Is it ever conveyed in an errant vehicle?
Let’s change the analogy somewhat. Let’s pretend that we’re talking about pure, life-giving water. As long is it is conveyed in a container that is pure, and designed to keep the water pure, we can be assured that the water is pure. It simply won’t matter the container, if these conditions are met. On the other hand, there will be no pure water if the container contaminates it, because it is an impure container. After all, the freshest, life-giving water is no good if poured into a container contaminated with typhus.
What about theological truth, then? Does it matter about the vehicle in which it is conveyed, or the container in which it is placed?
What do you think of the analogy? Does it fail somewhere, or is it a good one?
Just musing…
June 20th, 2012 at 8:16 am
I don’t like the analogy (sorry
). I’ll try to explain why, though I’m not sure I’ve really got it nailed.
A parable is fictional, just as a myth is. There is no reason a myth could not be used to convey truth, if it were honest about what it is (as the Scriptural parables are honest about what they are).
In a sense, since the parable is fictional, describing something that didn’t really happen, one could argue that it isn’t really a “pure” container. Yet, it is fit for containing pure truth because it’s fictional nature is clearly stated on the label, and so we know to look past its “false” history to the truth it contains.
In many ways I think the analogy is good. I guess I just don’t think it deals well with parables. And I’ve probably not explained why very clearly.
[Translate]
June 20th, 2012 at 10:03 am
Jon,
No need to be sorry. You have done nothing wrong
I understand that parables were often, if not always, fictional. The reality is that a parable is akin to an analogy and has parallels that are obvious, or are made obvious in the explanation provided in the Scripture.
A myth, however, seems to be more of a fictionalized story that focuses on how people considered the world in which they lived. Myth was the creation of man, as far as I can see; while parables in Scripture were used by Christ to convey truth. One was fiction that typically expressed more fiction than it contained. The other was fiction that expressed much truth, and was the vehicle that conveyed truth.
That being said, I think that is the fundamental difference between myth and parable. Does it cause my analogy to stand? Possibly not.
In the end, the true issue is: Does God use a soiled, tainted, errant container to give us inerrant and untainted truth?
[Translate]
June 21st, 2012 at 4:08 am
Side point: “Myth was the creation of man” — “invention” might be a better word, since someone could read that to be saying that the creation accounts are myth, and I don’t think you meant that.
As to the larger point, God will ensure that His truth can be clearly seen without taint. In general, I would answer your closing question with, “No, He will not use an errant container.” I’m still not entirely comfortable with the wording, though I’m having a hard time expressing why, so I’ll just leave it lest I wander into arguing about words to no profit.
You are making a solid point here, so I’ll quit distracting from it.
[Translate]
June 21st, 2012 at 9:49 am
Should you find a more precise analogy, please let me know. Pecision is important.
Thanks for the comments.
[Translate]