William Golding and the Bible as 'mythical truth'

[Username1]

There was a brilliant *Arena *documentary on BBC TV here in England on Saturday evening, about William Golding, author of Lord of the Flies. Anyone who’s read that novel, or indeed any of Golding’s work, will know how important a writer he is, and how he asks penetrating questions for the Christian faith on subjects such as original sin, free will and the meaning of mercy, to name just a few.

But one thing he said to an interviewer after winning the Booker prize for his novel *Rites of Passage *in 1980 struck me in particular. What he said was this:

I don’t like the word allegorical, I don’t like the word symbolic. The word I really like is mythic. And people always think that means full of lies, whereas of course what it really means is full of a truth that cannot be told in any other way but a story.

Now it seems to me that this is a highly insightful comment, and could certainly be applied to Biblical ‘truth’. I for one do not believe the Bible is always and everywhere ‘literally’ true (eg I don’t believe in 7 day creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a literal whale swallowing Jonah etc). (I do, though, think the gospels are about as literally true as it is possible for documents of that sort to be, and I certainly believe in a real, ‘literal’ Jesus who was the Son of God and who lived, died and was raised on the third day.)

But I do think the whole Bible - including all those strange OT stories - is true as myth, according to Golding’s definition.

Does that strike a chord with anybody else?

Shalom

Johnny

[redhotmagma]

Yes. Especially when you see how many of the stories and words are taken right from myth or are parallels to it. The names of pagan gods and their myths are EVERYWHERE in the bible. I don’t really know where the line is between “literal” and “myth”. Jesus spoke in parables and did not speak to the people except in parables. If He only speaks what His Father speaks, and only does as His Father does, then maybe thats what took place with the rest of the Bible???

I do like the word allegory though since Paul uses it in Gal 4. And Revelation is written in signs (signified). But I agree with the point he is making.

Btw there is a thread here I started called “mythology and the Bible”, that is delving into some of these thoughts.

[Username1]

Hi redhot

Thanks for your reply. And very good point about Jesus’ use of parables. To me, Jesus’ insistence on using parable - allegory, symbolism, myth, call it what you will - in His teaching is proof that the Bible need not be taken literally to be seen as true.

Thanks for pointing me in the direction of your thread on mythology and the Bible, which I will have a look at tonight. I’m sorry, I had missed that. I’ve changed the title of this thread to make the Golding connection explicit, and so as not to have two parallel threads running. Watching the *Arena *programme I was particularly struck by Golding’s statement I quoted. I think it’s the kind of thing CS Lewis would have endorsed, as I believe he said that the incarnation - indeed the Christian faith as a whole - is simply a ‘true myth’.

All the best

Johnny

[Alex_Smith]

This is an area I’ve been thinking about a lot this year, in particular. I certainly think “mythical truth” is a grossly misunderstood category for many Christians, including ministers/teacher who should understand it Anyway, I must admit that I lean towards your position on where to draw the line, although in most discussions with fundamentalists I’m happy to try to argue from their assumptions, to make it less complex/stressful for them (i.e. their B&W approach is simpler but I believe the reality is more complex). I don’t mean to being condescending by saying that.