Which Old Testament stories are figurative?

  • Thread starter Thread starter someone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

someone

Guest
Building off another topic, here is a quote from member Gorgias:
Some of the stories in the Bible – and, in particular, in the first few chapters of Genesis – are figurative, not literal. The Church would say that Genesis 3 is an example of a figurative story. That doesn’t mean that it’s not “real”, but rather, that a real lesson is taught through the medium of a story.

So, it’s difficult to address these nuances with a single, all-encompassing, blanket statement. Some narratives in Genesis are understood by Catholics to be historical narratives; others are not. We can’t just say “they’re not really history” without addressing which story and which genre of literature they represent.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard this view from many Catholic scholars before. Basically, some stories in the Old Testament are literal and some are more figurative.

My question is: which stories are meant to be figurative, and which stories are literal?
 
It just said in what you quoted that the stories are both literal and figurative, and then you immediately asked a polarized question.

i.e. The Tower of Babbel is based on some sort of ancient historic event but that doesn’t mean world languages came into existence several thousand years ago.

The Flood is based on an ancient historic event but that doesn’t mean Noah and Kevin Costner were floating around on a boat in Waterworld.

The stories are based on real people with a didactic purpose for the listener.
 
Last edited:
I think language might interfere with your query. Figurative doesn’t mean not true, it means a “type” as in romans where St Paul tells us that Adam is a “type” of Christ. The way the church describes it is that mythological language is used to convey truths. “The next day” vs 29, (2nd day in genesis) 35, 43, then chap 2:1 - three days later. In genesis man falls on the 7th day, in John, Jesus begins his mission to save man on the 7th day. Eve convinces Adam to listen to her, Mary as the new Eve does the opposite and tells them to listen to Jesus

The opening of Genesis has a plethora of types, for example the tree of life, the 7 day creation (a type used by St John in his gospel opening, i.e “the next day” vs 29, 35, 43 and 2:1 the third day) man falls on the 7th day, in John Jesus begins his mission of salvation on the 7th day. Days signify covenant. The dove over the waters in Genesis, the dove descending on Jesus in the waters of baptism.

These and many more are “types” or figures. I hope that helps when understanding what is meant by figurative.

Edit: sorry about the redundant paragraph, copied it over by mistake and too lazy to fix it.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
Last edited:
Uh… what? A polarized question? The quote said that the stories are real, but some stories are figurative, and some are literal. This is a fair analysis, and the most common view that I see.

I’m asking which are figurative and which are literal.
i.e. The Tower of Babbel is based on some sort of ancient historic event but that doesn’t mean world languages came into existence several thousand years ago.
Click to expand...
Ok, cool. So the Towel of Babel story is “real”, but the part of about world languages coming into existence several thousand years ago is “figurative”. What about the rest?
 
Babel is another great example of type: Man tries to reach God, who in turn scatters them with language so no one can understand each other. Pentecost: God descends to man and everyone can understand regardless of language.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
As Catholics we are free to accept the first 11 Chapters of the Bible, up until Abraham as either figurative or literal.

We must accept Adam and Eve as the first humans. But as for the rest of the first 11 Chapters up until the story of Abraham starts, we must read and discern for ourselves.

Some believe them literal and some believe them figurative and parts thereof. Read and discern.

At the stories of Abraham, the text becomes a Historical Narrative so this is literal.

Someone might think the Tower of Babel is real, others not. You must decide for yourself.
 
Aspects of a single story can be both literal and figurative, or didactic might be a better word. They sanctified the listener and made them appreciate the power of God.

We don’t have an authoritative way of knowing which are which (it’s not an essential question that we need to know) but some things are obvious based on historical knowledge, like that world languages didn’t start several thousands years ago, or the Flood, or the Creation account. We know that these stories had to be didactic.
 
Last edited:
There is a Magisterium to authoritatively teach us our obligations and instructs us how to live more selflessly.

There isn’t an official interpretation verse by verse of the Bible sitting in the Vatican somewhere, if that is what you’re asking. So yes, it applies to both the Old and New Testament. Theologians have given commentary on the Bible for centuries in order to sanctify the listener but they’re not a direct mouthpiece to God or anything.
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

So to clarify, are you saying that we must believe that the text literal starting at Abraham?
 
There isn’t an official interpretation verse by verse of the Bible sitting in the Vatican somewhere, if that is what you’re asking.
Click to expand...
There might not be a verse-by-verse comparison, but there is plenty of doctrine around the New Testament passages. For instance:
  • This is my body = literal
  • Jesus rose from the dead = literal
  • Cut off your limbs = figurative/metaphorical
But the Old Testament seems to be a huge mystery that I’ve never gotten a clear answer on.
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

Did all of their interactions with God actually happen as recorded? Did everything that God actually say all of things recorded things of the Old Testament?
 
Just as a caveat Genesis’ opening sans the NT was a vehicle (an apologetic) to contrast the one true God with the pantheistic view of the rest of the ancient world. One God, not many, the creator of all things, vs a god of the river, god of the sun, god of the moon, god of fertility etc.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
Yes, the Magisterium has made dogmatic statements when necessary on aspects of Church teaching, and it draws from verses of Scripture.

But there isn’t such a thing, for example, as a dogmatic commentary on John Chapter 6. The Old Testament is pre-Apostolic and so it is even harder and Christians as early as St Jerome knew this.
 
It starts the Historical Narrative, the story of the Jewish people, the story of Abraham , our spiritual father here on earth, if we are Christian. We are also expected to discern what is being said in each book and chapter and verse. It is not as simple as well everything here actually happened literally, but it is the story of a people.

What we need to remember more importantly than anything else is that the Old Testament is what God has given us as a means for our salvation and to prepare those living in the times, and us now, for the coming of the Incarnation-Jesus.

God does not give us anything we do not need for our salvation… You won’t find anything in the Bible books about black holes for instance, or the molecular structure of penicillin. Its all about our salvation and what we need to know for it.

The Old Testament is all about the Jewish People and their developing relationship with God also.
 
Last edited:
TK421 said:
Aspects of a single story can be both literal and figurative, or didactic might be a better word. They sanctified the listener and made them appreciate the power of God.
Click to expand...
I second that. The background of the story of Cain and Abel is a stone-age agricultural settlement. This is contradicted by archaeological evidence pointing to early humans living in nomadic tribes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top