Talk:The stories of Christianity

See Christian Mythology/Talk for some earlier talk on this subject.

---

on a question of method here, why did you use the see also link above as opposed to a simple redirect, or

a cut and paste of the text ?

---

Because some people might want to talk about Christian Mythology per se and the old article on that subject, while others might want to talk about the story of David and Goliath, for example, not under the heading of "Christian Mythology." --LMS

---

Even on the (I believe true) story of David and Goliath, I expect there are mythical (untrue) elements. I admit I have to struggle to recall many of these. For example, that David used a slingshot (a wooden forked weapon, typically with an elastic band) and that he tricked Goliath into a ravine so he wouldn't be able to fight back.

I'm not denying that. In fact, I personally believe very many of these stories, particularly the ones with supernatural elements, are completely false and mythological. I just don't want Wikipedia to say officially (as it were) that they're mythological (unless everybody is agreed they're mythological)! --LMS

---

I don't think the apocryphal stories should be singled out as being mythical. If we use the definition that I think is prevailing on the Christian Mythology page, calling the stories mythical is not supposed to be saying anything about their historicity one way or the other. It merely means they are making a moral or theological point. With that definition, all or nearly all the stories on this page would be considered mythical. And no, I have no problem with that provided that's really the working definition.

For hagiographies, just point to List of saints and go to invididual saints from there. That's where their stories ought to be, I think. --Wesley

---

Yes, maybe those stories shouldn't be singled out as being mythical, you're right.

Re the saints, sounds good. Or maybe a page called lives of the saints would be good to have, that could discuss the lives of the saints in general, and that genre of literature. --LMS

---

Why use the word 'mythical' if you want to say they are making a 'moral' or 'theological' point?

Why not just use the word 'moral' ? (or 'theological' ?) -- BenBaker

---

So let me see if I understand your point here, Larry. Because the word "myth" might be offensive to some who interpret it to imply falsehood, we shouldn't use that word for stories many currently-living people believe true, even if they are the same kinds of stories told for the same purpose, or even the very same story? So, then, the story about God instructing a worthy man to build a big boat, after which he sent a flood to wipe out everyone but the man he chose to save, that story is a Sumerian myth, and a Babylonian myth, but a Christian story. Hmm...

--LDC (With tongue only slightly in cheek)

Golly, you picked an embarrassing way of putting it--but yes. Exactly. --LMS

Moreover, I think it is very important that we say somewhere--I don't know where, perhaps even on the old Christian mythology page--that there are some people who do think it is important that we regard the stories of Christianity as nothing more than myth. (Attribution in this case would be nice.) --LMS

---

As the creator of the Christian Mythology page, I disagree strongly with the elimination of the page and with the redirect to "Stories of Christianity," for these reasons:

1) It is NPOV to have articles on Greek Mythology but not Christian Mythology.

I think you meant to say, "It is not NPOV..." I disagree, and I've explained why now I think in two different places. There aren't any Greeks about who believe the myths of ancient Greek religions, as far as I know. There are many Christians who do believe the stories (or, I'd agree with you, they're myths) of Christianity. It is completely biased to label those stories "the myths of Christianity."

(Also, totally irrelevantly: lower case, please!)

2) Christian Mythology exists, and "Christian Mythology" is the best way to describe it. Let me argue this point ...

The primary definition of Myth is "1 a : a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon." (From the Merriam-Webster dictionary). Using this definition, do stories that belong to the Christian tradition exist?

That's not a very good definition, insofar as it omits the what is very often conveyed and understood by the word, namely, that the myths are fabulous, false.

I cannot believe that anyone, using this definition, can disagree.

Obviously, the Christians who take issue with the use of the phrase do disagree--go figure.

The problem is that some people cannot help but use the 'secondary and derogative definition of myth. On the Christian Mythology page we debated this and resolved the issue by specifically spelling out the definition intended!

Well, I don't think that solves the problem. A lot of people won't care whether you've spelled out the definition.

Moreover, the newly invented term "Stories of Christianity" suffers from two fatal flaws, in my opinion. First, it is too generic.

More generic than "Christian mythology"? I don't think so.

Many stories that are about Christianity

The title isn't "stories about Christianity" but "stories of Christianity."

do not "serve to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon." For example, Billy Bud, by Herman Melville, is widely held to be a Christian story -- but is it myth?

Well, I wouldn't put Billy Budd in the "stories of Christianity" category.

Even more clearly, Robert Heinlein's sci-fi story Job is undeniably a story, and it is undeniably about Christianity in that it address biblical plots and themes (in what many would consider offensive ways) -- is it myth? Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose is a detective novel set in a monastary -- a story of Christiantiy? yes. myth? no.

Ditto.

The only way that these diverse words can be considered Stories of Christianity in the sense of Christian Mythology is if one redefines all stories as myths. If every myth is a story and every story a myth, why do we have any articles on mythology of any kind at all?

Please forgive the passion I bring to this topic. Frankly, I thought the version of the Christian Mythology page that was removed actually applied an NPOV approach to the topic, since it addressed the idea that mythology by its primary definition is not derogatory. -- Cayzle

I can accept that you in perfectly good faith (no pun intended) believed that the "Christian Mythology" article was written from the neutral point of view, but I (also in good faith) totally disagreed. Let me save this and explain...

Seconded. --Dmerrill