John Oswalt's The Bible Among Myth

Introduction John Oswalt, in his book The Bible among Myths, provide the readers with a brief, yet extensive of the variance and likeness Old Testament and Ancient near East religions. In the introduction he provides a brief outline of scholarly concerning the Old Testament literature and Ancient near east literature and how viewpoint change in nearly 50 years. Oswalt states at the time he was acquaint with to the subject scholar believe the Old Testament and its religious studies stood alone from others ancient near east religions. Oswalt talks about how humanity has a hard time accepting that we have to depend on someone other than ourselves to supply our basic needs. Oswalt explain how Israelite literature and culture were similar
The first half of the book, “The Bible and Myth,” Oswalt takes the time to define what a myth is and what differentiates the Bible from a myth. The first chapter deals with the Bible in the framework of its backgrounds and its influence to humanity at large. The second half of the book, “The Bible and History,” look at several philosophical thoughts proposed by others that attempt to explain the Bible’s importance separate from historical authority. Oswalt states that there are many contributions to the way the Western world views reality. The Bible, however, is the most important backer. The Greek and the Hebrew peoples joined their ways of thinking about reality in several ways. The Greeks’ normal thought combined with the monotheism of the Hebrew people. The Greek belief in the law of non-contradiction come together with the Hebrew belief in God being single and distinctive from
Before outlining the word, Oswalt revisits the idea that scholarship has wandered from the view that the Bible is exceptional from the other writings, religions, and cultures of the Ancient Near East. Since the 1960s, scholars have been stating that the characteristics of the Bible and its modern belief systems have more in common that are in opposition even though the data used to support these claims have remained the same. “One of the groups of definitions falls into the category of the historical-philosophical. The first definition of myth in this category is known as the etymological definition. The emphasis here is placed on the “falseness” of the deity or event.” (Oswalt 2009, 30) The second is described as the sociological-theological definition. In this definition, the truth is seen as relative and something is considered true if it is seen as true by others. The last definition within the historical-philosophical category is the literary definition. With this definition, the events are not seen as right or wrong. Instead, the history employs heavy use of symbolism to express its