NOM

I think I've made it obvious that I like fiction a lot, and I like discussing fiction. One of the things that I really like is discovering or being made to discover is a hidden meaning in a film or book.

One easily seen example is in the film Pulp Fiction where Jules and Vincent are sent to retrieve a briefcase. What's precisely in the briefcase doesn't matter in the least. The director even says it's basically a MacGuffin. None of that stopped him from surrounding it with religious imagery, when all is said and done. The case has a combo with a religiously significant number, Jules spouts a bible verse (which is somewhat roided up) once he and Vincent take possession of it, they are in possession of the case during the "miracle of the bullets" and probably most significantly, Jules' refusal to let it go mirrors his refusal to backslide into violence as a solution. And in the end Jules, who has embraced a "higher standard" (symbolized by the religious imagery), has a redemptive arc in the story. By contrast, Vincent "dies by the sword" so to speak, after refusing to heed the lesson or message of the events surrounding the case (although we never see Jules' ultimate fate).

None of this is too far below the surface narrative and I think it's certainly the intent of the director to imply these things. So what does this have to do with scripture and other religious texts? One of the things that comes up is the literal truth of the bible (I think the question of the veracity of the BoM has been mostly put to rest on this site) and how important it is. I think the best example that relates to a "fictional story" as above is probably the book of Job, which treats the misfortune of a human being as a spiritual contest between supernatural beings. It's heavily criticized by atheists and other non-Judaeo-Christian followers from time to time as a demonstration of god's immorality (playing games with the lives of humans) but is the story more valuable as a metaphor? Is it possible it's a lesson not about endurance for the sake of reward, but rather because the virtue of endurance is itself a reward? I think maybe it is.

And here's where I think the two relate pretty well. Sure, the reader/viewer is shown outcomes of either heeding or dismissing the "lessons" of the story, but in the end they're both about the internal reward of virtue for its own sake. Or at least I think so. Because I think the story of Job could be told with god and ha-satan as pure metaphor and still work just as well, and it's Job's own perseverance that gives him the qualities that enable him to find a future happiness despite his grief at his losses and suffering. Likewise, Jules may be a vagabond but he greets his future with a contentedness we never see in other characters. The stories aren't a perfect comparison, but they both use religious and supernatural imagery to some degree to illustrate the test of virtue. Is this the most valuable use of scripture and fiction alike?

I'm not claiming to be right. I'm very curious what others think though. I like to believe that many of the most influential texts in the world have greater value than my own atheistic mind wants to credit, so maybe I'm just seeing something that isn't there. Like to hear other ideas though.

Mad Jax wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 9:40 am Is it possible it's a lesson not about endurance for the sake of reward, but rather because the virtue of endurance is itself a reward?

Possibly that or a tale about the zen of sadomasochism.

When we are able to view our religious canon as sacred allegory, it becomes easier to have that aspect of our lives mesh with the rest.

All I know is that if,on any of the times I prayed about the Book of Mormon, I had felt as much emotion as I did watching Pulp Fiction I might be forced to accept both Joseph Smith and Quentin Tarantino as true prophets in these the latter days. Thanks for you observations, Jax.

moksha wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 12:28 pm

Mad Jax wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 9:40 am Is it possible it's a lesson not about endurance for the sake of reward, but rather because the virtue of endurance is itself a reward?

Possibly that or a tale about the zen of sadomasochism.

When we are able to view our religious canon as sacred allegory, it becomes easier to have that aspect of our lives mesh with the rest.

I think I see what you mean, do you think the more important lesson is the temporal one then? Or that the spiritual aspect was intended to have equal or possibly greater value by the writer? I know it's impossible to be certain and that one can only speculate.

I suppose there's also the perspective that there is no difference if one takes a broader view.

Mad Jax, as far as I can tell, it is a story about human suffering occurring despite virtue or lack of virtue. There has been a lot of scholarly speculation on the religious meaning of Job over the centuries that I know nothing about.

On an easier to grasp temporal level, it suggests that s**t happens that is beyond our control. Since the latter message on the temporal level rings true with my experience, I think I will go with that. So instead of schadenfreude-fueled Elders suggesting that the victims of Hurricane Katrina had it coming because they were basically impure and undelightsome, I find it easier to grasp that they were simply inundated by the forces of nature in a flood prone area.

Completely metaphorical

My view is that scripture and religious text is largely (and in some cases, entirely) metaphorical. Some scriptural examples would be blatantly evil or immoral if viewed through the eyes of a literalist; or rather, such examples should be viewed as blatantly evil or immoral from a literalist perspective, but for the fact that your average Biblical literalist has a moral philosophy that hasn't developed beyond the most rudimentary form of divine command theory.

Scriptural authors in some cases were rather blatant that they were playing fast and loose with "historical fact" (as such a thing would be viewed in the modern context) in order to have the "facts" line up to convey a deeper meaning (e.g., take "Matthew's" purported genealogy of Christ at the very beginning of the New Testament and his selected omission of various generations in order to make his numerology stand up--"Matthew" likely wouldn't have even viewed this as problematic, even though the very records he was referencing to construct the genealogy would have proven him wrong, because the point wasn't to set down historical fact as we view that concept today--the point was to convey meaning about who/what Christ was through mystic numerology that only worked if he fudged the actual details).

This doesn't make scripture meaningless, of course, and makes it easier for people to expand its meaning to whatever importance they want to assign to it. On the other hand, maybe it means it is also does not convey lessons in an inherently more meaningful way than, say, The Lord of the Rings which itself is full of omni-religious imagery--though perhaps the Bible deserves a nod for its role in shaping human history in a way that some of these other fictional books did not (both for better and worse).