I said
recently that the movie, Saving Mr. Banks,
could provide a helpful analogy for
Scripture http://www.copyblogger.com/metaphor-simile-and-analogy-what%E2%80%99s-the-difference/
First a
recap:
Saving Mr.
Banks is a movie.
The movie is
based on a real life event, the making of another movie (Mary Poppins)
The movie
was based, in large part, upon a book written about the woman who wrote the
Mary Poppins series, but included some memories of people involved (written and oral sources).
The Mary Poppins
series, while fictional, still weaves
together true life events, ideas inspired by true life events, longing produced
by true life events. It has all manner of intentional (and unconscious) choices
made by the author, PL Travers which communicate to us (sometimes without her
knowing it) things about her as well as providing popular children’s reading. http://www.theherald.com.au/story/2022935/movie-review-saving-mr-banks/?cs=2373
[The movie,
Mary Poppins, is quite different from the books. (I never read the books and
saw the movie when it first came out). For example, Movie Mary is a less
austere figure. However, my intent is not to analyze the author, book, movie
and movie about the author and movie. It is to draw an analogy to Scripture.]
A movie can
only be based on real events. It is not c-span, with a camera trained on the
scene. (and even c-span, with its simple relay system of film and send cannot
give us the whole story. Without background information and in depth knowledge
of the people involved what appears on the screen is always hard to interpret
accurately). If the event is more than two hours then a movie has to edit endlessly.
A particular moment is forced to carry the full weight of a character. Perhaps
three or four different events are combined in a true but not literally how it
happened image. It is how artistic (and all narratives, especially history, are
a work of art) endeavors seek to communicate.
Like Ms.
Travers (whose name is a literary creation, taken from her father’s first name.
Helen Lyndon Goff is here given name) Jesus is a real live man. He was born and
lived in the Middle East some 2000 years ago in a Jewish family. He is called “the
Christ” which is a literary title. It means “the Anointed” and refers to a
large number of folk in the Bible—including Kings and priests, and perhaps even
some prophets. As we recently wrote, it was used by Isaiah to refer to Cyrus,
the Persian king. In a sense, the term anointed (Messiah) is a metaphor, referring
to God’s chosen heroes in every age. Now, the NT makes clear that Jesus is not
any Messiah, He is the perfect Messiah, the fulfillment of the Messianic (hence
Hebrews calls Him a high priest).
The Gospel ‘book’
(Bible is Greek for book) cannot contain all the events of Jesus’ life. The
writers were terribly limited physically (it could take weeks and months to
copy words on the ancient parchment, and there were limits on space and pages
we do not have today). The Gospels as presently constituted take as long to
read as it takes to watch a longish movie (2-3 hours) so the analogy has some
basis.
The writers
have to combine their materials available (both written sources and oral
tradition, stories which floated around the church) in a way which conveys the
point(s) they are trying to make. In the Fourth Gospel the author tells us
twice that what was in his Gospel is a small part of what Jesus did, but he is
telling us the things he tells us so that we will come to faith. In other words,
he tips his hand. His intent is to bring us to faith, so he shapes his story
telling to clarify for us that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and the Savior.
A book
cannot contain all of a reality. A movie cannot contain everything in a book.
The Jewish Scriptures serve as a book source to the Gospel (movie). As such, we
understand the latter better if we know the former. It may be helpful to stay
aware of how all human communication works, especially if we believe the
inspired authors of Scripture were humans.
Thinking
about that process (events, interpretation, writing, later editing, and later
events, most importantly Jesus’ life, which was lived in dialogue with that
written Jewish text—and those events being written by other people reading the Jewish
Bible and constituted as a narrative). The whole complex process is much broader
and deeper than words like ‘fact’ can convey.
What really
happened entails meaning, too. How the authors, following ancient rules for
writing and operating with ancient expectations for writing, convey their
information must be seen as more complex than a c-span window into Jesus life.
And I for one continue to wrestle with exactly what does that mean!
No comments:
Post a Comment