Verbal Tradition over time.

In response to the comments I received on my previous "Blog This" post, I offer this:


Ask someone their recollection of a familiar unforgettable newsworthy story about something that happened thirty years ago. Have them tell the story to you with as many details as they can muster. Now, run out and tell a friend about this story that happened thirty years ago as related by your friend. Have that person spread this message verbally. Now, wait ten more years. Keep telling the story. Try to find your friend again to repeat this story to you now. You told them at the outset that you would ask about this story again. Compare how the story varies from the original account (that is to your memory of the original account.)

Finally, go back and check the actual news accounts of this story as it appeared in newsprint when it happened. Compare what you remember being told, what your friend recounted to you ten years later and then, ask the original person again to tell you the story again and compare that to the original account when it happened. When I say "as it appeared in newsprint", that might beg the question, "which version." Take a look at any news account of unfolding stories and you will find that facts are wrong from the outset. Then, over time, perhaps corrections are printed - but often times, the readers of the initial story do not ever find out the "final" story. You might get a thorough recount of a big news event on the anniversary of the event, which we would hope would have the advantage of time and all the dust settling.

When comparing the verbal account the first person to the newsprint story, you will find it varies from the original in some respects. Memories fade over time and they lose details or are embellished a bit to make them seem more interesting - intentionally and unintentionally. It is human nature and how the brain works and forgets.

Now, take a look at your average bible. None of the authors are 100% authenticated. The bible is made up of translated stories from a time when religion was an entirely verbal tradition, told from generation to generation. At some point, they decided to write it down. And it isn't one story, it is 67 some stories or books. Each one with its various translations and variations.

I know, my little example of some story recounted thirty years later, then comparing it to a news account at the time is very simplistic. With a religion, the adherants would likely be taught the religion constantly over time and likely, the story would be ingrained into the brain so much that variations might be less than in my example. Rituals and such reinforce the meaning. But, the basic problem of human interpretation and ongoing alteration of long told stories is a fact. Just think how a local church is run today. They may have great variation from a congregation of the same denomination across town. Think about all the different and disparate brands of Protestant Christianity. These are an outgrowth of the interpretation of the meaning of the bible and of different doctrines being adopted. Maybe that is to simple of an explanation, but you get the point.

So, the recording of what happened to Jesus 2,000 years ago, written by unauthenticated writers at various times thirty to 100 years after his death, and then the whole "official" bible being voted on by a group of supposed wise individuals even later than that; then further changes to the text in the translations from the original languages undoubtedly takes its toll on the whole process.

This isn't to say that what is written isn't the basic essence of what people came up with long ago, but it does point to the fact that claims of people speaking to god or to the prophets are dubious at best. Think about my little example of a news account, then wrap your mind around the story of Jesus' crucifixion, and realize it wasn't put into it's current form for at least 30 YEARS after his death. And with accounts of resurrections and crucifixions being commonplace in that era, who's to say that the jesus story is not just a convenient compilation or mashing together of what the "church" wants you to believe? From what I understand, there were many different brands of religions that spawned around the time of and after Jesus' time. There was a concerted effort to quash all of these disparate religions that varied with pieces of Judaism, Paganism and what became Christian doctrines into one cohesive story, which became the "New" testament.

If I pick up a book written in 1920 by a particular author, I can look to many other sources to check the validity of the book's claims. What was the author's reputation? Was he a good fact checker? Did he have the wherewithal to write on the subject his book covers? All of these things can be scrutinized when we know who the author is. It doesn't guarantee that the author is authentic or that his story is true, but at least there is no hiding who wrote the book.

With the entire bible, we just don't know who wrote it. Yes, there are claims, but those claims are just that. Basically heresay. Not authenticatable. The first four books of the Christian bible are similar in their stories, known as the Gospels. So what. Repeating the same lie or story isn't really that hard.

And, if we have an active god present in our lives, then why does he not speak to great people today and why isn't the bible being added to? What was so special about the time of 2,000 years ago that privileged them to the have talks with God or events so great that they warranted all that is written at the time? God just seems to have gone to sleep on the official word, right? Couldn't a real author write another god inspired book for the bible, in modern times? No. That would mean acceptance by churches, both Catholic and Protestant, and it would open the whole thing up to scrutiny. Who would have the authority to write such a thing? With the way and when the bible was constructed, it makes it somewhat immune to current scrutiny (at least by believers of the faith, that is.)

So - go ahead, tell your kids a story over and over. And see how it is told to their kids and then their kids. Then go back and compare the original story (locked away from viewing) - and see what you get. My bet is variation.