Christians and Mythology (Part 2: Propriety)

Jeremy Larson

JanusRead Part 1.

The ubiquity of mythology is undeniable, but to what degree should Christians interact with mythology? An answer in the third-century would most likely be in the negative if answered by the church father Tertullian, who famously asked, “What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem?” Tertullian didn’t have time for a “mottled Christianity,” mixed with Platonic philosophies or other heresies.

But what about an answer in the twenty-first century? What amount of involvement with pagan mythology is proper? Christians and non-Christians alike have had differing responses to this question.

Bradley Birzer writes,

To the modernist, “myth,” like religion, merely signifies a comfortable and entrenched lie. For the postmodernist, myth simply represents one story, one narrative among many; it is purely subjective, certainly signifying nothing of transcendent or any other kind of importance. For religious fundamentalists, myths also represent lies.1

Some fundamentalists may object to Birzer’s taxonomy, but I have witnessed a similar reaction by a fundamentalist leader. A few years ago, I presented this topic at a conference for educators, and at lunch, just before I held my workshop, I mentioned to an inquiring stranger2 that my workshop had to do with the benefits of mythology. He commented that it sounded like “benefits of paganism” and questioned whether there could be any benefits of paganism.3

Discussion

People of God: The People of Israel

Kevin T. Bauder

NickImageRead Part 1.

In the Bible, a people or nation is fundamentally an ethnic unit. Its solidarity stems from the fact that all individuals in the nation (with rare exceptions) are descended from a common ancestor. Ammonites come from Benammi. Moabites come from Moab. Assyrians come from Asshur. Even when a people no longer remembers its specific ancestor, the sense of ethnic solidarity remains.

This is not to say, however, that all individuals who can trace their lineage to a common ancestor are necessarily a people. Abraham and Isaac both had two sons, but in neither case did their descendents comprise a single people. Jacob had twelve sons, but these sons and their immediate families did not by themselves constitute a people. When Jacob and his household went down into Egypt, they were a family but not a nation.

When did the family of Jacob become the nation of Israel? This question cannot be answered in terms of numbers alone, as if 100 Israelites remained a family but 100,000 could constitute a nation. Common descent may be a necessary condition of biblical nationality, but it is not a sufficient condition. Something else has to be added in order to transform a group of related individuals into a people. Something else must take place in order for a large number of related individuals to galvanize them into national awareness. Other factors are essential to becoming a people: usually some combination of a common language, the occupation of territory, submission to a common religion, and, perhaps most importantly, a significant level of national self determination through a national leadership.

Discussion