Question... Is it possible to be a Christian but approach the Bible as if it were a "Mythbusters Special?"
Because, really, if you look at it... At face value, without investigation, the Bible is certainly a book of myths... Mythbusters breaks it down like:
BUSTED - This myth is not true whatsoever
PLAUSIBLE - This myth very well could be true
CONFIRMED - This myth is not a myth - it is fact.
Now, granted, I'm not exactly a student of the Bible, but a big interest in my life is the ancient world, and the Bible and the stories therein are a huge part of that. I've done some personal studying (though surely not as much as others on here), but at least I'm semi-acquainted with the field.
I also like all those Discovery Times, National Geographic, Science Channel, etc., specials on religion (which seem to be on ALL the time now, btw). Admittedly, if the History Channel is any guide - these will be flawed. But they do often raise interesting questions and possibilities.
Now (back on topic), these shows, and my readings, have pretty much convinced me that all three Mythbuster categories can be found in the Bible...
BUSTED - Worldwide flood during man's time, the creation of the earth, beasts, and man all within seven days. You can scream and believe it all you want to, if you figure it'll save you from hell or for whatever reason, the bottom line is, these things just did not happen. If you think God appreciates your unwavering belief in such things, fine. You call it faith, I call it sucking up.
PLAUSIBLE - Three wise men, ten plagues of Egypt... The "scientific" explanation for the ten plagues obviously can be argued against, but the whole domino effect idea is certainly plausible.
CONFIRMED - Jesus Christ lived, Paul travelled around the world, etc. Other sources mention them (and sources that aren't Christian-friendly, either).
Now, this is all assuming we're taking the Bible word for word here. But if you're willing to see it as a "rough guide" to what "basically" happened, even more stuff becomes plausible.
Noah's Flood? Well, take your pick: Gilgamesh or the Black Sea forming. Either would leave an impression. Globalwide? No. A regional devastation? Yep. During man's time? Sure is. Seems pretty obvious to someone not blinded by faith that something like this is probably what the Bible is referencing.
I dunno. There are plenty of scientific explanations for things in the Bible. The problem is, every time you try to apply one, you don't get the same precise results the Bible speaks of. So is it blasphemy to say "I basically believe in the Bible, but much that is referenced in it is obviously an embellishment of events that probably did happen, just not exactly as stated therein?"
Basically, I'm willing to believe in the plausible. But not in the busted. Shall I buy some asbestos underwear? Or is "ok" to not blindly follow the crowd?
