> Many atheists say the same thing as I am saying about the need for the Bible
> to be historical. On one list I wrote:
> >GM>If the Bible is nothing
> >>but a nonhistorical set of nomad myths, which are objectively false, then
> >>why bother with christianity. To say everything in a document is
> >>historically false but the message in it is true, seems ludicrous to
>me.
The position you oppose here doesn't remotely approximate
anything I've said. E.g., Jonah is not a "nomad myth" but a brilliantly
crafted short story. & the real historical elements (e.g., Jonah, the
city of Nineveh) aside, to say that it conveys no truth if it didn't
really happen is a commentary on the hearer or reader, not the story.
George Murphy