[Serious] The Story

[John 6IX Breezy]

Daniel seems like an odd example for the initial assumption you describe, though?  There was no daniel to have an experience that needs to be explained by neurology.

Do you ever wonder if making initial assumptions like those causes you to miss a great deal of the content of the narratives?

One of the interesting things about narrative is that it comes embedded within a point of view. And even if you don't think Daniel existed, the story is still being told from his point of view. When people tell personal stories in real life they usually construct two landscapes, one of actions which focuses on what the protagonist did, and one of consciousness which focuses on what the narrator feels and believes. Daniel, in this chapter, is clearly filled with that internal landscape: he describes to us how it felt to have that experience, how his muscles weakened, how he felt fear, how he fell to the ground.

Another thing that often characterizes narratives of personal experience, is that they tend to revolve around unexpected or troubling events. They are attempts to resolve the discrepancy between what was expected and what transpired. Those are usually the stories worth telling. And there are many ways a narrator lets the reader know what their troubling event was. In Daniel's case this is communicated by his response to it. We know he was personally distressed by the event because he lets us know it was distressing. Or rather, he shows us how his body responded (e.g. unable to speak, unable to breathe) and we infer distress from that.

That mirrors a lot of how people tell their personal stories.

Now, am I missing more content than that? No, because I don't believe there is more content that the author is wanting to communicate. That isn't to say it's not interesting to see all the places people take biblical stories and their interpretations. However, I see those interpretations more as a window into the reader than the author. And I like to keep the two separate.