Despite the Historicity of Biblical Characters, the Bible is Never About Historical Characters

Yes, I know that sounds self-contradicting, but it is true. Many of the names in the Bible are found in ancient inscriptions. They were historical people. Well known and famous. THAT is why many of the people named are named -- they were so well known and famous that anyone would recognize them and want to read about them. But the stories in the Bible were about what the authors wanted to say. The historical characters were fit in in the appropriate symbolic location and function for the purposes of the scriptures.

For instance, George Stanley Farber points out that the historical Moses did lead his people out of Egypt into Canaan and gave them laws. But he also lived and died there, unlike the Bible-story Moses. His dying on the eastern side of the Jordan and his grave never being found are functions of the Bible. They are not untrue because they didn't happen to the historical character; they are true because what the Bible is about is true and they function for THAT.

I bring this up because I am very, very aware that 'Ashur' is the historical Nimrod, the focal point of innumerable Pagan idolatries. He, his father Cush, and supposed mother and wife Semiramis were the unholy trinity of the Pagans. Supposedly, when they died they became gods and could be invoked to do whatever you needed. Save your postcards and letters, folks, I already know it. Except remember, the Bible is never about the historical character EVEN THOUGH HE OR SHE DID EXIST. The Biblical truths are true of themselves, and the historical characters are allegorical VOCABULARY used to illustrate the truths. For God speaks to us in illustrations. Illustrations of truths. Of Himself.

So Ashur might have been one of the fountainheads of Pagan idolatry, but he may function in scripture as an allegorical illustration of truth. He was founding an empire for his father by force. Being made strong (ashur), he builded where he lived. I take this to be allegorical of the imagination's role in assumption: subjectively appropriated, it hardens into objective fact.