More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
J. Pittman McGehee

J. Pittman McGehee

Posted: March 23, 2010 02:30 PM

A Revisionist Interpretation of Myths

What's Your Reaction:
"The inner spaces that a good story lets us enter are the old apartments of religion." --John Updike

Many conservatives and fundamentalists refer to people like me as revisionists, and I that that as a compliment, because I think stories need to be revised. They need to be seen and heard again with critical eyes and ears for the 21st century. We keep the stories alive when we re-interpret them for ourselves and ask questions about their relevance to our own lives. As it says in Proverbs, "Without vision, the people perish."

Despite my reputation as a liberal, I am pretty conservative in one area: I think we all ought to read the Bible, or whatever the sacred text or texts of our particular religion happens to be. You should read for yourself, instead of relying on secondhand interpretations that might be intended to serve some interest other than your own.

We place our religious resources in grave danger when we rely on so-called authorities to do the interpreting for us. The myths of the Bible, such as the creation myth of Adam and Eve, came out of the collective unconscious. But then, the male authorities of a very patriarchal culture edited the Bible, canonized it, and interpreted it for us. Men were put in charge of the myths and their patriarchal fingerprints contaminated them. That's why I recommend that we read the Bible for ourselves and become our own authorities.

You might be surprised that your experience with the stories may be far different from the first time you heard them, when somebody else interpreted them for you. These rich and varied stories are like diamonds that can be turned over and over, revealing very different facets that can be appreciated in varied lights. They are like literary kaleidoscopes, so that when you turn them in different ways you can see different formations.

If religion is about the business of helping us become human, then these sacred stories are about how to be human. That is what religion is. To me, the idea that these myths welled up out of the collective unconscious is a liberating and empowering realization.

For some, questioning the purported infallibility of the Bible is heretical. For others, it's liberating. I say take whatever train that will get you where you need to go. My own liberation train helps me become my own authority, granting myself the right to critique the self-appointed religious authorities and power brokers, both past and present. That's where the opportunity for growth is.

A large part of the human enterprise is for us to eventually, sometime in our lives, stand up and say, "I'm ready to live my life. I'm going to become my authority and act as the interpreting body for my own life. That's my responsibility - and privilege - and I can't or won't abdicate it to an external authority."

Claiming our autonomy and authority is the most exhilarating part of the human enterprise, and it's something we must do, despite the cost. While the cost is often dear, the cost of not doing so is even greater, for we deny ourselves entry into the kingdom of God. We must choose to start the journey.

My own journey was that I finally woke up one day and said, "I'm going to quit being afraid of this and quit avoiding it. I'm going to get myself to it. I want to get in it and live it. I may make mistakes and I may be criticized, and there will be those who don't like the way I'm doing it, but I'm going to do it."

This is what's commonly called a conversion experience, and when it comes in the form of claiming rather than abdicating authority, of deciding to seek truth and mystery at whatever cost, rather than trying to desperately fix the truth to a dead God image, then it is truly a liberating and life-affirming experience.

We can be liberated from the stringent fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible myths and begin to collaborate with our souls and God to embrace our own conversion in our very own distinct and individual fashion.

 
"The inner spaces that a good story lets us enter are the old apartments of religion." --John Updike Many conservatives and fundamentalists refer to people like me as revisionists, and I that that as...
"The inner spaces that a good story lets us enter are the old apartments of religion." --John Updike Many conservatives and fundamentalists refer to people like me as revisionists, and I that that as...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 24
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cheryl Petersen
07:42 PM on 04/15/2010
We all are revisionist. Some poeple just don't know it. My cat thinks he is a dog.
When I read anything, I am revising the reading through my own perceptions. When you read the same thing, you are revising the reading through your perceptions. We can only do the best revision work possible, and it helps NOT to assume we aren't revising while someone else is....I am for revisions because I learn from others and believe in expansion.
www.HealingScienceToday.com
03:30 PM on 03/29/2010
A common thread in this article and in the responses to it is that the author himself used the term myths and accurately points at the corruption of historical references and/or myths either consciously or unconciously, directly or indirectly by the PEOPLE that write those stories down and repeat them. Well, everything he said there is very true.

If you want to understand the Civil War you dont read one book in 2010 written by a white southerner immediately after the war in 1865 and then profess to understand every complex aspect of that war. That would be utterly ridiculous. Also a book written immediately after the war by a single source would probably be more emotional and less objective and would be less likely to be able to explain the underlying reasons for the war then a book written years later after years of careful research and study of MANY sources and perspectives of information.
The truth is that documents from ancient history are almost NEVER objective, unbiased, unemotional, honest and fair. A common theme of ancient text is the authors regularly used ridiculous elaborations and/or outright lies in order to please their ruler and/or audience at the time. The only true thing about the bible is that most of the stories in it are just those sort of ridiculous fabrications that earn the term myths.
05:21 PM on 03/25/2010
who needs "holy books?" "holy men?" metaphors, myths and fear mongers... try living by the universal golden rule.
03:49 PM on 03/29/2010
Actualy the golden Rule was around as a concept way before the bible and was adopted by the bible.

In the bible God first tries his hand at Dictatorship with the 10 commandments. Once that fails due to the disobedience of his hopelessly flawed creations he then crucifies his kid and then says, through the new testament, "There are only 2 Commandments now - Love God and Love your neighbor."

Well, that really is the golden Rule in essence, the Love your Neighbor part. Why? Because if you did love and obey the imaginary deity you believe in as God you would do WTF he said and if you did love your neighbor - ALL OF YOUR NEIGHBORS you obey te Golden rule. And...if you do that you cant possibly violate the other old school 10 commandments or the golden Rule which is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

So you see, its all the same thing really, nothing new. Why you need an entire book full of stories about threats, intimidation, fear, and atrocites to try to get across the basic fundamental Peace concept of "Love your Neighbors" or "Do unto others" is something that I will never understand. Frankly, that whole fear approach God implemented in the bible hasn't worked a damn bit. Humans are still the same self-serving, unfair, dishonest, and inherently flawed creatures that the imaginary deity first turned loose in the imaginary garden.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bsmithslo
10:58 PM on 03/24/2010
There is a certain arrogance about people who believe they are "revising the Bible with critical eyes in order to meet the needs of the 21st century." It assumes that no one else who has read the Bible has read it critically, that believing people do not already constantly reinterpret the text to meet their current needs, and that his revision is superior to any other, not because it accurately reflects the original viewpoint but rather because it doesn't.
01:19 PM on 03/24/2010
"Men were put in charge of the myths and their patriarchal fingerprints contaminated them. That's why I recommend that we read the Bible for ourselves and become our own authorities."

Probably these points have already been made but...why would anyone waste their time reading something, or trying to interpret it, when it's already corrupted? Or that these myths rose from the unconscious? Why not instead research to see if the Bible actually has been contaminated or the scripture has been taken out of context?

"I'm going to become my authority and act as the interpreting body for my own life. That's my responsibility - and privilege - and I can't or won't abdicate it to an external authority."

So Jesus Christ, the Bible, Paul, etc. are not useful authorities? If Jesus was who he said he was, and there is a cumulative case pointing toward that very fact, wouldn't you think he would have some insight and authority?
photo
JohnFromCensornati
The End is near
09:49 AM on 03/24/2010
"The myths of the Bible, such as the creation myth of Adam and Eve, came out of the collective unconscious. But then, the male authorities of a very patriarchal culture edited the Bible, canonized it, and interpreted it for us. Men were put in charge of the myths and their patriarchal fingerprints contaminated them. That's why I recommend that we read the Bible for ourselves and become our own authorities."

I think it's curious that you recommend reading a book of myths that has been edited and contaminated by people you apparently distrust.

"You might be surprised that your experience with the stories may be far different from the first time you heard them"

I'm not going to read them, but if I did, I expect they would seem even more shocking, offensive, and disturbing than the first time I heard them as a young person.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KrautMan
Carpe jugulum
08:45 AM on 03/24/2010
It's totally beyond me how one can muster the insight to classify the bible and other "holy" books as man-made myths and on the other hand still grant them the attribute "sacred". Stuck in the middle imho and in this case that's not a very sensible or comfortable position.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Schiavo
Poet
05:55 AM on 03/24/2010
As Emerson wrote in his essay "Character": "No change of circumstances can repair a defect of character. We boast our emancipation from many superstitions; but if we have broken any idols, it is through a transfer of the idolatry. What have I gained, that I no longer immolate a bull to Jove, or to Neptune, or a mouse to Hecate; that I do not tremble before the Eumenides, or the Catholic Purgatory, or the Calvinistic Judgment-day,— if I quake at opinion, the public opinion, as we call it; or at the threat of assault, or contumely, or bad neighbors, or poverty, or mutilation, or at the rumor of revolution, or of murder? If I quake, what matters it what I quake at?"
03:49 PM on 03/23/2010
"We can be liberated from the stringent fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible myths and begin to collaborate with our souls and God to embrace our own conversion in our very own distinct and individual fashion."

Why not take the next step and liberate yourself from soul, God, and the rest of the mythical fantasy common across the different religions?

Michael
photo
whirlpool
founder walnut tree congregation
05:10 PM on 03/23/2010
So having a soul is a mythical fantasy? That is cold!
photo
whirlpool
founder walnut tree congregation
05:15 PM on 03/23/2010
Here are a few of the many definitions of soul. I can see why you might object to a few I didn't list, but these! 4. the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5.
a human being; person.
6.
high-mindedness; noble warmth of feeling, spirit or courage, etc.
7.
the animating principle; the essential element or part of something.
8.
the inspirer or moving spirit of some action, movement, etc.
9.
the embodiment of some quality: He was the very soul of tact.
07:52 PM on 03/23/2010
Are you being deliberately obtuse? This is an article in the religion section and clearly refers to religious definitions of soul. #7 is the closest thing you've listed to the typical religious usage and that would seem to imply the "animating principal" being separate from the body, not an emergent property of it.

So sure, I'll class the typical religous/spiritual definition of "soul" as fantasy (with an extremely small possibility of one being found somewhere/somewhen just as with other supernatural entities). There's no evidence for a "spirit" being somehow infused into a person. And if you want to complicate that by adding a supernatural entity that is doing the infusing, then the remote probability gets even more remote.

If someone wants to say "that blues singer has SOUL!" I've got no problems with that because that doesn't drag in any supernatural concepts. That's just commenting on the skill/emotion being used and/or conveyed by the artist.

Michael
photo
whirlpool
founder walnut tree congregation
02:51 PM on 03/23/2010
I am inclined to agree with you. Although I don't for one minute believe in a "god" like the OTG, I do think there is great value in some of the Bible stories and other stories from mythology. Ovid's Metamorphosis comes to mind and the Iliad just to mention two. More recently several of Steinbeck's works were based on Biblical mythical themes. These and other great pieces of literature do have an archetypal structure beneath and within them as described by literary theory as in Foulke and Smith -- An Anatomy of Literature. Since the Bible has such an influence on Western civilization as a foundational document for better or worse, it behoves us to try to understand it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Magick1
Dark fire shall not avail you. You shall not pass
05:18 PM on 03/23/2010
Most all great works of literature are based on good and evil, heros and fallen. It does not matter whether it is one mythology or the other. The basis of literature is the same. It reflects man and his conditions.
photo
whirlpool
founder walnut tree congregation
05:27 PM on 03/23/2010
I have found it to be a bit more complicated than that. There are several archetypal patterns in literature that are common to most if not all mythologies. You might be interested in Foulke and Smith's book.
09:54 PM on 03/23/2010
In other words, your are recapitulating Northrop Frye. Try his The Great Code: the Bible and Literature. Frye is the acknowledged expert on mythic archetypes and literature.