a metaphorical Bible

Not too long ago I read a heartfelt essay from a self-identified Christian. He attempted to argue that "overly literal" interpretations of the Bible may reflect a disdain for truth. To summarize, he claimed that since the Bible contains apparent contradictions with itself and with external reality/history, e.g. locations that are difficult to distinguish, timelines that are too compressed to be real, etc., then no serious believers should try to put their faith in dubious biblical facts. Rather, he advised them to acknowledge metaphorical truths of the Bible. Therefore the stories have moral points, the events have mythological impact or emotional heft, and of course God's actions are presumably hypothetical examples for mankind.

My reaction to this is a little complex. I don't think the Bible is intended as a stringently historical document. Not all of the tiny details of an eyewitness account must be perfectly accurate in order for the major points to be materially true. I also don't think the Bible is intended as a science textbook (flashback to 2007 with that link!). Its focus is clearly on interactions between God and pre-scientific people.

However, my assumption remains that the Bible is an imperfect communication of absolute truth. God is a creator, ruler, provider, and savior. God has acted in many ways as the Bible describes. Given these premises, "miracles" are quite possible. Furthermore, God came in the flesh as the man Jesus, died, and rose. Regardless of the fuzzy narrative liberties that may exist in the Bible, these items happened. Christians settled on such theological points. Their goal wasn't to stifle reason or individual experience. It was to avoid mass confusion and false education as the spread of Christianity inevitably led to people who wanted to use it as a base ingredient of flashy/attractive sects and religious mishmash.

Here, a metaphorical Bible begins to break down, because the entire Bible surely isn't intended to be entirely metaphorical. "Metaphorical truth" is convenient above all. By definition, metaphors don't have independent/self-evident meaning and implications. Like poetry, metaphorical language requires the reader to reconnect the text with something else to attain the whole word-picture. They must read between the lines, expand, contract, whitewash, recolor, add, erase. A metaphorical Bible is ideally suited for a postmodernist who wishes to construct a "brand new text" from out of the interaction among writer, text, reader, subtext, context, etc. In this process, the reader's expectations are automatically confirmed.

Shifting meanings of metaphorical truth are also convenient guides for behavior. Commands that seem right to a man are less metaphorical, and the lesser-liked are more metaphorical. In extreme cases like that exhibited by the essay that I read, there isn't anything unique about the Bible in comparison to any other "metaphorical book". After all, morality tales elsewhere are also good for encouraging nice living and knowledge about basic human nature. I anticipate the next essay from the writer (the following is not a quote, only a guess):

Perhaps we should form an afternoon church service around intense study and celebration of Aesop's Fables. In fact, all the Christian singing and recitation about atonement is a really difficult metaphor, so let's drop it. That applies tenfold to the awful stuff about being a "bought slave to Christ". And Easter can't be about actual resurrection; it's an existential literary illustration of the positive human ability to continually redefine your personal identity as you see fit. No wonder all the people whom we like will join us in heaven regardless of religious inclination. Their sacred books are just as metaphorical as ours. And those atheists who don't live like jerks are gonna look so surprised when they receive their reward of eternal blessings right alongside us...