God Never Said The Stories Of Jesus Are Literal

I was raised to think that every story about Jesus in the Bible was true.  Like, 100% literal.  


Cast out demons? - Yes.


Walked on water? - Absolutely.


Water into wine? - Duh.


Virgin birth? - Unquestionable.


Rose from the dead? - Don't even bat an eye at it.


Fed 5,000 people with some fish and bread? - 100%.


I remember when I was a kid in a private Christian school and I'd hear these stories, I would wonder to myself, "really?  Like, this stuff happened?"  And the answer I always got in school was that they did happen, that they happened exactly as the Bible says they happened, and that they weren't to be questioned.


Never.


Ever.  


Because if you did question them and if you did let your mind wander to whether or not they're literal historical fact then you ...


Head down a slippery slope.


Open yourself up to the Devil's influence.


Will begin to question other things.


... And will soon end up believing that nothing in the Bible is true.  


I believed this for a better portion of my life. I'm 39 now and it wasn't until I was about 34 or 35 that I began looking at that way of understanding the stories of Jesus and seriously putting it to the test, asking it some very pressing questions.


Like ...


How can we say that the stories of the Gospels are 100% factual when the earliest Gospel we have (the Gospel of Mark) was written somewhere between 35 and 40 years after Jesus died? And the latest (the Gospel of John) some 60, 65, 70 years after Jesus died?


35 years is a long time. So is 60. or 65.


70 years is even longer.


Can we really say that what Mark was writing from 40 years earlier happened exactly in the way that he said it did? Yeah, I know all about the "oral traditions", but are you telling me that all the stories passed down over 40-70 years are without blemish? Never changed? Heck, I can barely remember what I wore yesterday much less what happened 35 years ago. 


AND.


Was that even Mark's point in writing? Or Matthew? Luke? John? Scholars tell us that Biblical writers weren't so much concerned with relaying truth as historical fact, but truth as what adds meaning and purpose to human life. In other words, their intention in writing a story wasn't to give us a play by play of exactly what Jesus might have said and did, but to tell the story of Jesus in a way that portrayed deeper truths about him and what he taught.


Said differently, although Jesus was a real person, many of the stories we have about him aren't necessarily filled with real events, but parables and stories that tell us more about who he was and what he did.


None of that is to lead us astray, by the way, but to lead us deeper into the wonder and mystery of the person of Jesus.


I had a professor in seminary, for instance, who I would say was a mentoring figure in my life and I would even say that he instilled in me the courage to spread my wings. He helped me find my voice, walk on the waters of my fears, find inner peace, and calm the storms in my heart.


Did he literally give me courage? 


Help me spread my literal wings?


Show me how to walk on water?


Calm storms?


... Of course not. I use that language not to give you a play by play account of what my professor did for me or to deceive you into thinking he actually did those things, but to paint a deeper picture of the impact he made on my life.


I think the same is true with the stories of Jesus ... in some ways, at least. Like, perhaps they weren't written to give us a play by play historical account as much as to paint a beautiful picture of the impact his life and teachings made on the people of his day and that they can make on our lives today if they're applied, practiced, and expanded on for our 2021 context.


On top of that, Jesus primarily taught in ... what? Parables. And so if Jesus taught in parables, doesn't it make sense that those who interacted with him would write about him and tell stories about him in parables? They're just doing what they saw him do, no?


I don't think it's too far-fetched.


And so all of that leads me to my point - God never said that the stories of Jesus are literal stories. There's no book, no chapter, no verse where he said that they are. Sure, Luke says that he wrote things down to give an "orderly account" of Jesus' life (Luke 1), that other people have undertaken a similar task, but that he was now on the scene to create the best account, the most orderly account ... but what does that mean? What does orderly mean? A play by play historical account? 


I think that's an awfully big assumption to make. 


I mean, a lot of people have podcasts and blogs that talk about themes in progressive Christianity. A lot of people have undertaken the task to draw up an account of things like hell, LGBTQ inclusion, the Bible, and other stuff that I talk about. And they do it really well. No doubt. But I set out to draw up my own orderly account of those things here, at the What If Project.


Why? 


Not because they are wrong.


Not because I'm right.


Not because I'm better.


BUT.


Because I want to put my own twist on it; I think I bring a unique perspective to the table. Perhaps that's what Luke meant by an "orderly account" - his own unique perspective. 


So, yeah, I stick by what I said - God never said that the stories of Jesus are literal stories.


And so Matthew says Jesus spoke about "hell". So what? That doesn't mean there is a hell. Or that he even spoke about hell. There's talk about a virgin birth. So? There are plenty of stories in history of Kings and Emperors being born of a virgin. It meant that they were special, that they were set apart. Perhaps the Christians wanted to put Jesus on that level of specialty? Who knows. Historians say that he was definitely crucified, but did he rise from the dead? Or was the story of the resurrection a metaphor? There's talk in the New Testament about him coming back to make all things new. Assuming he did rise from the dead (I happen to believe he did, by the way … I think? I don’t know.), is he really coming back? I mean, isn't he already here? Perhaps the Spirit that lives within us all is the second coming of Christ and perhaps the new world that the prophets pointed to is meant to come through you and through me and through our words and actions and life and interactions with others? 


Listen. I'm telling you all of this because I want you to know that it's OK to buck the system and go against what others demand is "orthodoxy". All the stuff I just shared with you ... 


Go read John Dominic Crossan.


Go check our Marcus Borg.


Go look at Alexander John Shaia.


Go read Rob Bell.


Heck, go read CS Lewis.


... I'm not the first person to suggest this sort of stuff and I won't be the last. It's OK to think differently about the stories of Jesus and refuse to see them as iron clad rules and regulations that demand how you are to think, believe, and live your life.


May the stories of the Christ INSPIRE you. May they cause you to DREAM big about your life, about your purpose in the world, and about the wonderful ways that you can make this beautifully tragic world more and more like heaven, a place filled with love and peace and grace and mercy and inclusion of all people, everywhere.


Peace.

Glenn Siepert