> Now, some, like George will contend that this is precisely his point. One can
> not take these verses as historical. They are true but non historical. I agree
> with George on this. But that is no reason to believe that every problematical
> passage can be interpreted as poetry, thus escaping possible falsification.
Let me clarify my view briefly. I'm not saying all
non-historical parts of Scripture are poetry: The obviously non-literal
character of Ps.23, e.g., simply illustrates the fact that literature
can be true without being historical narrative or scientific
description.
But there are other possibilities. E.g., fiction such as The
Good Samaritan. (Or, I would add Jonah. & if that suggestion bothers
anyone, ask yourself if that is because of an _a priori_ assumption that
Jonah can't be true unless it is historical narrative, which begs the
whole question.) Or cases where we have 2 accounts, 1 of which seems
pretty close to straight history & the other theological reflection on
that history: Much of Samuel/Kings & Chronicles are in this relation.
George Murphy