GENESIS 1-11 MYTHS IN THE BIBLE

Q: Many of the stories in these chapters have been called myths that were borrowed from pagan cultures. Does that mean that they didn't really happen?

I usually steer away from talking about whether the Scriptures themselves are mythic in nature because, as you indicate, “myth” in modern usage means a lie and is placed in the same category as belief in the tooth fairy. Actually, the primary meaning of the word is “a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining some natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.”

Examples in the Bible include the Creation Myth with its three-tier universe, God wrestling with the forces of chaos symbolized by the ocean and the sea monster Leviathan, the mythic Tree in the Garden of Eden found in other cultures, the Flood Myth with its close parallels to Babylonian stories, the well-known story of a dead god rising from the underworld, popular pictures of Sheol in neighboring cultures, and language from poems to Baal being reworked in the psalms to praise Yahweh.

There are several ways of viewing these mythic parallels:

1. The History of Religions movement uses them as proof that there is no such thing as true revelations from God but each succeeding culture utilized some beliefs from previous cultures and built on them to suit their own needs.

2. Some examples such as the reference to god(s) residing on Mount Zephon in Is. 14:13 just accurately portray the beliefs held by the pagan nations at the time (Babylon in this case) without in the least indicating that the Jews themselves believed those myths.

3. Some of the mythic language of neighboring nations is utilized because it would have been familiar to the Jews at the time. However, it is transformed in the Bible so as to be used in the service of the true God. This is much like Luther turning popular drinking songs into hymns.

4. Many of the so-called parallels in the Bible to pagan mythology are actually quite a bit weaker than originally portrayed by liberal scholars. One example would be the so-called primal struggle between God and chaos.

5. In some cases, the direction of borrowing is very much in question. One example is the Flood Myth. Scholars are now not sure whether the Jews borrowed it from an earlier Babylonian account, whether the reverse is true, or whether both derive from a common source (perhaps from a memory of the actual event recounted orally throughout the ages in each culture).

6. Lastly, there is the approach of C. S. Lewis to consider. As you know, he was a trained classical scholar and teacher who was thoroughly acquainted with the myths of early cultures. The similarities between Christian beliefs and the Norse and Greek myths, such as the miraculous birth of a god-man and the resurrection of a hero or god from the dead, had been (and continue to be) used by skeptics to cast doubt on the historicity of the Bible. By contrast, it was these same similarities that were partially instrumental in converting Lewis from his earlier agnostic position. He reasoned that God would not have introduced Christ into the world without first preparing the people for that event, which was done by direct revelation in the case of the Jews and by the introduction of appropriate mythic beliefs into the other cultures. The coming of Christ was “myth become history.”