Finding Truth in the Bible: A lesson in History

February 18, 2024

In two of today’s readings we have a reference to the story of Noah and the Flood. This is a very popular story, and off and on we have ‘reports’ that an ark has been found here or there.  Similarly, I have once read a report claiming to mathematically prove that in fact Joshua did stop the sun in the sky (Joshua 10:13) till the Israelites won the war when they were entering Canaan .  There have also been attempts to prove the possible whereabouts of the Garden of Eden. These are all attempts to prove the historicity of these BIblical stories. A similar kind of effort is found in many religions.  

If, however, we take up the Noah Flood story, it is probably not known to too many Christians that stories similar to this are found in many other religious/cultural traditions.  For example, there is the Mesopotamian Gilgamesh flood story where the ark builder is Unapishtim.  In Aztec mythology, a man named Tata and his wife Nena make a boat out of a cypress tree after being warned by God about a flood, while in Hinduism, Manu is guided by a fish to the top of a mountain and is thus saved from a flood. Similarly there are flood stories in Greek, Chinese and other cultures. So while it is clear that the elements of the Noah story is certainly not limited to the Judeo/Christian/Islamic tradition, and that different stories have alternative heroes to Noah,  it will be more useful for us to ask why there are so many similar flood stories in so many cultures?  One answer is that there may have been large scale floods experienced by various cultures, or alternatively that there was just one such humongous flood  which was remembered by human beings as they migrated from our original evolutionary starting point (presumably in Africa??) to the rest of the world.  So, probably the Noah story and all these other stories have some remembrance of a flood that remained in human beings’ collective memory, and each culture then created their own respective stories (myths?) around that event.

Then there is the reference to the rainbow in the first reading of today as a sign placed by God in the heavens as a promise to human beings never to destroy them in that way again.  It is, of course, very likely that there was a rainbow after the rains and the flood, (an event that occurs even today after the rains), but was the explanation of why a rainbow is seen in the sky, perhaps just a way of finding meaning in a wondrous experience of early human beings, especially as rainbows come after the rains, and so is easily connected to the flood story?

In other words, we have in various Scriptures a nuanced view of history. Very often in the scriptures of various cultures, we find that an ‘experienced’ event/reality was interpreted to convey a message about the relationship of human beings with the divine. So, in Hinduism, for example, the epic ‘Ramayana’ tells us the story of Ram, who represented what a ‘maryada purushottam’  (the ideal man) would look like. And it is interesting to note that across India many sub-cultures created their own version of the Ramayana, each showcasing slightly different aspects of this ideal man, as compared to the original one created by Valmiki. Although, today, people are fighting about whether Ram was a real person or not, the essence of the story was the expression of the belief of what an ideal man, living in harmony with the divine (therefore an avatar of the divine),  would look like. Similarly, in the story of Adam and Eve, the reality being explored was the true experience that  human beings, though being created by a good God, seemed so prone to doing evil.  There are many other stories in the Bible (both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament), that are meant to communicate a theological/religious message, and it is this that we must look for in every Scriptural passage. And so, just like it often seems that science is at odds with religion (see my blog: Religion and Science: The Eternal Battle, Feb 4, 2024) , so too does it seem that our present understanding of history is often at odds with the ‘history’ found in religious scriptures.  

But, what is history? Whether in scripture or in what we would accept today as valid historical texts,we must remember that a historical account is not just a recounting of ‘facts’, but includes an interpretation of these facts, trying to draw out relationships between one fact and others. For example, reading the history of the Second World War, some of the most popular historical accounts place the blame for that War on Hitler and Germany, while some less popular ones place it squarely on the Allied powers who sought to effectively destroy the German nation by forcing the latter to sign  the Treaty at Versailles.   Facts and interpretations of the facts !  Several years ago, sometime in the 90s, a 14-year old boy, Nathan Zohner, presented a project to his class on Dihydrogen Monoxide. He explained that the chemical was so caustic that it “accelerates the corrosion and rusting of many metals, . . . is a major component of acid rain, {and} . . . has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients." He also noted that symptoms of ingestion of this chemical include "excessive sweating and urination," and "for those who have developed a dependency on DHMO, complete withdrawal means certain death." Zohner then asked his classmates to vote on whether they thought that the chemical should be banned. 43 out of 50 children voted to ban the chemical. Nathan later revealed that the chemical he spoke of was H20 or water. However, all the points that Nathan had conveyed were completely accurate, and yet he was able to skew the information to convey a message that led to it being seen as a dangerous chemical. This phenomenon later came to be called as Zohnerism.  

Similarly, in today’s world we can find facts to justify almost any position, creating an increasingly polarised world in which many bemoan that it is so difficult to know the truth. This polarisation is further enhanced because of the way computer-based algorithms work today, where they keep track of what we ‘click’ on and then proceed to increasingly feed us primarily with those ‘facts’ or opinions that we have already shown an affinity for, or are amenable to - whether it be news items, opinions, advice, and even advertisements. So, if, for example,  I click on a news article that explains the need for stronger immigration laws, or the need for a freer environment to allow the expression of dissenting views, my news feed starts showing me more articles and other links with the same perspective.   And so we tend to be more and more entrenched in our own perspectives or, some would say, our own biases. So, despite access to a vast amount of information, we are sometimes led further and further away from the truth.  

But do we want to find the truth? In the realm of religion, do we want to find the intended meaning of a particular scriptural passage or do we only want additional support to strengthen what we already like to believe?   Finding the message intended would mean that, for example, in today’s second reading, when Peter makes a reference to Noah, and to Jesus visiting the spirits in prison after his death, the questions we have to ask are not whether there was a person called Noah, and whether he did in fact build an ark, nor who were the ‘spirits in prison’ or where was the prison which was visited, but rather what do we make of this statement, or what is the message that Peter, the writer, is trying to convey to us.  

The desire to find the message intended  in a Scriptural passage, the desire to not let one’s beliefs too completely control what one explores (though there will always be some influence of our beliefs), is something that Scripture scholars have struggled with when trying to sift through the many stories about Jesus in what has come to be known as the Quest for the Historical Jesus.  For example, they will ask whether the Temptations story and the Crucifixion story are to be treated as reflecting ‘history’ in the same way? And so they have come up with various criteria to help us judge various narratives about Jesus in the Gospels. For instance, they take the story of John the Baptist baptising Jesus, and conclude that such an event probably did occur because Jesus’ disciples who were in ‘competition’ with John the  Baptist’s disciples (about which we have other evidence in the Gospels), would not willingly create a fictional story that puts their Master ‘below’ John, since it is to John that Jesus comes (and not the other way around) and requests to be baptised.  Or when the Gospels tell us that Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem because of the census organised by the Roman Emperor, scholars find ways of checking Roman and other non-Christian records and writings to see whether there was indeed a census around that time, and if so try to determine when exactly such a census took place. And after doing that, they point out that, if indeed the census was the reason for them to go to Bethlehem, then Jesus could not have been  born in the first year of AD, but was probably born around 4 years earlier, i.e. around 4 BC (Before Christ).  This kind of approach troubles many, because holding on to a belief that every line in the Bible is literally true gives us clarity and certitude.  Of course, this latter approach is not sustainable as I have shown some Bible evangelists when in response to one quote from the Bible, I have quoted other quotes from the same Bible.  Thus, if they point to Jesus being God by quoting what Jesus is reported to have said in John 14:11, “I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (John 14:11), then I will ask them how they square that with what Jesus says in John 20:17 "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God".  Finally, they end up having to ‘interpret’ one or the other, thus confirming the fact that even the Bible needs to be interpreted, and cannot always be taken at face value or literally.   

All this explains why teaching catechism to teenagers, who usually have many questions, is extremely difficult. But what is also really troubling is that even adult catechesis  is often taught in a manner that treats adults as children, offering them the same childish assurances that are given to children.  And even more saddening is the fact that many of us adults (in all religions) are quite happy with our childhood catechesis, and do not make the effort to find an adult way of understanding our faith.  The fact is that many of us feel ‘safer’ with the beliefs we have grown up with since childhood, because when it comes to religion, it can be quite unsettling and even disturbing to change one’s long-held views

Disturbing as it may be, we need to acknowledge that, like any other source, the Bible too is based on a variety of perspectives of the different authors who wrote the many books that comprise this Scripture. For instance, when we read in Mathew’s Gospel that Jesus did something  ‘in order to fulfil the Scripture’  we are warned by Scripture scholars that it is quite likely that this particular phrase was inserted by Mathew,  since he was writing for a Jewish audience, and his theological intent was to establish that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah promised in the Scriptures - and that Jesus probably did not have this intent in mind. But that does not mean that the story has no meaning. Finding the meaning or finding the truth begins with asking the right questions - What is this story trying to tell us? What are other parts of the same story telling us?  What other information can we gather from other stories/ information written by other contemporary writers who did not have the same perspective? And so on and so forth.  We may never get to the absolute truth, but the pursuit of truth - and not attempts to justify our already comfortably held beliefs - will probably lead us closer to the truth.  This is as true about the Bible and the Scriptures in any religion as it is about any other source of information that we may receive today - whether it is from social or other media,  or from the government in power, or those in opposition, or from scientists who often disagree with each other, or from anywhere else.

And just as a responsible citizen must ask questions when sifting through the various views presented to us, if religion is a significant meaning-giver in our lives and not just a duty that has to be carried out with the least amount of ‘disturbance’ to our personal lives, or out of a hidden fear of some ‘backlash’ from a God who is monitoring us carefully, or just to satisfy family peace requirements or other such reasons, then asking these questions is important.  

In this context, perhaps we could reflect on a line I heard in a TV series I recently watched that said ‘If we search for truth, we may find comfort, but if we search for comfort, we may never find truth”. 

First Reading: Genesis 9: 8-15

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, “As for me, I am establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you, and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the domestic animals, and every animal of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark. I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh.

 

Second Reading: First Peter 3: 18-22

For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God. He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison, who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight lives, were saved through water. And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.

 

Gospel: Mark 1: 12-15

And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness.  He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him. Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God,  and saying, “The Time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent and believe in  the good news.”