Religion Is Made Up

[Kratos]

I know I will be in the minority, but whereas I agree that most of religion is made-up, I do not believe that God is.

 

I believe that God is real and everyone knows in a part of their heart that this is so.

 

<snip>

 

It is not easy to be rid of religion when you know in your heart that God is there. But, I cannot deny that knowing so it is what I am left with.

 

John

 

Kratos, I am one of "everyone." By asserting that I know in my heart that God is real you write off an entire lifetime of searching for evidence that God is real. Read this post and then provide the evidence by which you know that I know that God is real.

 

Ruby,

 

I really do try to be clear, but language continues to be what stands between us in understanding. I did not say that I "know" that everyone knows in a part of their heart that God is real. I said that I "believe" that everyone knows this on a subconscious level. So I cannot provide any evidence by which I know this as it is just my belief.

 

As usual, my beliefs come from what I have been taught by God as I understand Him in the Bible.

 

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

 

I know scripture is usually off limits, but this is why I believe that all know about God. I realize that most anthropologists believe that making up God-myths is the normal reaction to the unknown by primitive tribal people, but I am not so sure. It seems more likely to me that all have a subconscious "knowing" of God which brought all peoples to create myths to fill in the blanks where their inner knowing was not specific enough to satisfy their desire for answers. Thus, they took the knowledge of God that was given to all of mankind and changed this into myths and animal idols etc.

 

It is hard to imagine with our modern minds (no laughing, please) what a primitive mind must have needed to dispel fear in the unknown, but I doubt I would have created such God-myths just because I did not know why it rained or what happened if anything after we died. I would think that there would have to be some inner catalyst that was common to all humanity for this universal human trait of including divinity or supreme beings in their culture to be so prevelent in so many unconnected cultures.

 

The question would then have to be, if God has revealed to everyone made about Himself, why do we not "consciously" know this universally? I am not an expert in this area of our human make-up, but I would say if any part of us supports the possibility of something being hidden from us it would have to be the unconscious mind. They say we only use 10% of our minds and those who study dreams and trance states etc. often come away saying that there is more to us than what can be consciously understood or measured or studied. I know sometimes something that cannot be detected through our physical senses can only be discerned by the results that they cause on those things that touch them.

 

Is it possible that there is a hidden God-consciousness that is common to man and resutls in all cultures creating God-myths even though this "God knowing" cannot be consciously detected? I think so, but this is just my belief at this time.

 

John

[Ouroboros]

I really do try to be clear, but language continues to be what stands between us in understanding. I did not say that I "know" that everyone knows in a part of their heart that God is real. I said that I "believe" that everyone knows this on a subconscious level. So I cannot provide any evidence by which I know this as it is just my belief.

And yet, you believe there is a God, hence you don't know there is a God, and you would be at least one that does not "know" on a subconscious level and your belief that everyone does know this is hence wrong. I suspect that you still use the word "belief" in two very different ways.

 

1. Belief as an absolute fact and knowledge - when you talk about believing in God, you mean that "belief" as that you "know"

2. Belief as an non absolute knowledge, but rather a strong suspicion - when you talk about "believe" that everyone knows that God exist.

 

So which way is it? Do you know there is a God, and everyone knows there is a God on subconscious level, and you believe they do so, and you can't just believe that God exist since it is a knowledge? Or do you just believe there is a God the same way you just believe that most people believe there is a God?

[Kratos]

I know this will frustrate some, but my answer again relates to our two ways of knowing something. I define the carnal mind as the intellectual part of us that can only know if it can be proven physically or in another way that satisfies the human intellect. The spiritual mind is that which knows intuitively what is so in the unseen realm of the spirit.

 

With that foundational understanding of how I think, I believe that there is a God with my carnal mind and I know that there is with my spiritual mind.

 

I do not believe that the knowledge of God can be anything but a belief in the realm of the intellect. You can only know with the intellect what can be measured or sensed with the physical senses. However, I do believe that we are capable of believing with this part of our being.

 

Having been a Christian at one time in your life, I think you can relate what it means to know spiritually something that cannot be known carnally.

 

Perhaps a lame example might help though imperfect on every level. If you would ask me if my wife loves me, I would say that I know that she does. You could argue that love cannot be known, but I can only believe that it is so. I have to say that I not only believe this with my intellect, but I know it in my heart. In fact, this heart-knowing is more sure to me than my head believing.

 

So it is with the knowledge of God. I acknowledged that I can only believe this in my head, and yet, I know it in my heart.

 

I believe that everyone made knows this in their heart though only few believe it in their head. I have heard it said that even the most devout atheist will unconsciously cry out to God while falling off a cliff. If they survived, they may say that this is just a result of their culture coming out in a stressful situation, but I would say that their inner God-knowing was able to get past their carnal mind in a situation when thinking was impossible.

 

But, still, just my beliefs.

 

John

[Ouroboros]

Well, you see Kratos, the problem I have isn't that you believe, but that you use the word interchangeably without distinction. You'd probably be better of by using different words for different purpose, instead of mixing them and cause confusing arguments. If you feel that belief is strong and a firm knowledge, then use it as such, always, and not sometimes for something that you suspect or hope or somewhat think that could be true.

 

So I guess your position is that you know for a fact, that everyone subconsciously know for a fact that God exists?

 

When it comes to "carnal" knowledge and "spiritual" knowledge, I'd say that the "spiritual" kind is more of wishful thinking. It's hoping that it is true, but not really knowing.

[Kuroikaze]

Having been a Christian at one time in your life, I think you can relate what it means to know spiritually something that cannot be known carnally.

 

I actually can relate to this, however, I have since rejected the idea of "spiritual knowledge" if you understand me. The reason I rejected it was simple, my "carnal knowledge" or as I would call it, rational thought, contradicted what I was being told to believe as far as spiritual knowledge, I was being told many things by many people, as well as my own bible reading, and studding of theology and christian philosophy from people like Kant. What I found more and more was that "spiritual knowledge" not only was in conflict with rational thought, but quite often with itself as well.

 

My choice was to either give up all rational thought, or give up my religion, and believe me I toyed with the former quite a bit, I was really into Kierkegaard's notion of lauding the belief in the irrational as something noble in religion. I finally realized that I was driving myself crazy...literally, I would have probably had a nervous breakdown if I had not deconverted, life from that perspective had ceased to make sense, forcing myself was just impossible.

 

So, to reiterate, I reject the notion of "irrational knowledge"

 

Perhaps a lame example might help though imperfect on every level. If you would ask me if my wife loves me, I would say that I know that she does. You could argue that love cannot be known, but I can only believe that it is so. I have to say that I not only believe this with my intellect, but I know it in my heart. In fact, this heart-knowing is more sure to me than my head believing.

 

I don't think this analogy works very well, because I think one can deduce rationally that ones wife loves them, through empirical observation. The fact that she doesn't leave every time one does something idiotic would be a good indication. In any case, communication with a person you can see is not nearly as one sided as communicating with god.

 

So it is with the knowledge of God. I acknowledged that I can only believe this in my head, and yet, I know it in my heart.

 

I believe that everyone made knows this in their heart though only few believe it in their head. I have heard it said that even the most devout atheist will unconsciously cry out to God while falling off a cliff. If they survived, they may say that this is just a result of their culture coming out in a stressful situation, but I would say that their inner God-knowing was able to get past their carnal mind in a situation when thinking was impossible.

 

metaphorical language like "know it in my heart" only seems to serve to muddy the waters as far as I can see. Knowledge cannot come from the heart, as it is only a muscle. What you are really pointing too here is emotion, and while emotions serve a purpose, they are not known as a repository of knowledge, and oft lead us to make mistakes.

 

submitting that all of us "really know god exists" is a good way to get your ass kicked around here, a few months ago and I might have been doing the kicking. I have mellowed a bit, perhaps

 

Just because you dress the insult up a bit nicer than most of the fundies would doesn't make the statement any less insulting. A pig in a tuxedo is still just a pig when you get right down to it.

[Ouroboros]

I agree with Kuro,

 

Love is usually proven through action. Love is confirmed. When we don't see the people who say they love us act accordingly, we start to question if they love us for real or not. Women wants to get their husbands love reaffirmed in simple "I love you"-s and some gifts and flowers now and then. If the husband doesn't... he'll hear about it... for several hours... I know...

 

Anyway...

 

Love tends to be affirmed, sometimes it's just with a look, sometimes a word etc, but never is love proven in absence, inaction or rejection. Those things usually prove the opposite.

 

So, if I call out to Zeus when I fall of a cliff, it would prove that Zeus must be real?

[sojourner]

Kratos: carnal mind as the intellectual part of us

 

I do not understand this at all.

 

carnal=

Pertaining to the flesh, or fleshly desires.

 

 

intellectual=

of or relating to the intellect; "his intellectual career"

of or associated with or requiring the use of the mind; "intellectual problems"; "the triumph of the rational over the animal side of man"

cerebral: involving intelligence rather than emotions or instinct; "a cerebral approach to the problem"; "cerebral drama"

a person who uses the mind creatively

 

 

I do not equate intellect with carnality personally and I find it interesting considering that God is intellectual according to the Bible. I would think that if you believe in the Bible, God, creationism and Intelligent design then you must have to see the intellect is not carnal.

 

sojourner

[Guest JAH]

I do not believe that the knowledge of God can be anything but a belief in the realm of the intellect. You can only know with the intellect what can be measured or sensed with the physical senses. However, I do believe that we are capable of believing with this part of our being.

 

John

 

I'm sort of with ya on that one pal. I believe knowing God intellectually is probably but knowing Him in the lowest realm of our being.

I love how Fenelon describes the knowing of God ........ some of you peeps may not be able appreciate the content but you got to love the language.

 

It is the height of folly to seek to measure infinite love by human wisdom.

 

O my God! who art at once so great and so condescending, so high above the heavens and so accommodated to the misery of the creature, so infinite and so intimately enclosed in the depths of my heart, so terrible and so lovely, so jealous and so easy to be entreated of those who converse with Thee with the familiarity of pure love, when will thy children cease to be ignorant of Thee? Where shall I find a voice loud enough to reproach the whole world with its blindness, and to tell it with authority all that Thou art? When we bid men look for Thee in their own hearts, it is as though we bade them search for Thee in the remotest and most unknown lands! What territory is more distant or more unknown to the greater part of them, vain and dissipated as they are, than the ground of their own hearts? Do they ever know what it is to enter within themselves? Have they ever endeavored to find the way? Can they even form the most distant conception of the nature of that interior sanctuary, that impenetrable depth of the soul where Thou desirest to be worshipped in spirit and in truth? They are ever outside of themselves in the objects of their ambition or of their pleasure. Alas! how can they understand heavenly truths, since, as our Lord says, they cannot even comprehend those which are earthly? (John iii. 12.) They cannot conceive what it is to enter within themselves by serious reflexion; what would they say if they were bid to come out of themselves that they might be lost in God?

 

As for me, my Creator, I shut my eyes to all exterior things, which are but vanity and vexation of spirit, (Eccles. i. 14,) that I may enjoy in the deepest recesses of my heart an intimate companionship with Thee through Jesus Christ thy Son, who is thy Wisdom and Eternal Understanding. He became a child that by his childhood and the folly of his cross, he might put to shame our vain and lying wisdom. Cost what it may, and in spite of my fears and speculations, I desire to become lowly and a fool, still more despicable in my own eyes than in those of the wise in their own conceit. Like the apostles, I would become drunk with the Holy Spirit, and be content with them to become the sport of the world. (Fenelon)

 

 

O my God! keep me ever in the number of those babes to whom Thou revealest thy mysteries, while Thou concealest them from the wise and prudent!

 

Jack

[Kratos]

Kuro,

 

Your testimony completely agrees with what is revealed in Romans 8. It says that we know God with the mind of the spirit, but when we choose to be carnally minded, we no longer can retain this knowledge.

 

Many have a childlike faith in what they know about God as long as they are able to retain contact with the mind of the spirit. But often, Christians begin to seek truth about God by means of the carnal mind or intellect instead of by the Spirit. This may manifest through study of the sciences or philosophers or whatever.

 

Then, they have a moment where they know that this carnal mind is at enmity with the knowledge of God that they once retained through the mind of the spirit and a choice must be made. Will they make this distinction and retain both means of knowledge or will they need to reject one totally for the other.

 

On the one extreme, there are those who feel they can no longer retain the knowledge of God through the spiritual mind and still be true to what they have now discovered through the carnal mind. Many here may find themselves in this group.

 

On the other extreme, there are those who feel that they must suspend their mind and intellect in order to remain "spiritual". These are the ones who hold doggedly to young earth theory or litteral interpretations of all Biblical accounts even those that are clearly meant to be symbolic.

 

I fall into the third group. Heb. 4:12 says that the Word gives us the ability to separate between soul (or mind) and spirit. Both are valid and needed parts of my make-up and I see no need to neglect or deny the one in order to be all I can be with the other. With my spirit, I know God and the realm of the spirit. With my mind, I know science and philosophy and mathematics etc.

 

I do not try to know or explain or prove God through my soul or carnal mind because this aspect of my human trinity cannot do so. I will just frustrate myself and those around me. Neither will I try to explain science or philosophy through the spiritual mind. The spiritual mind does not know these areas nor can it adequately explain them.

 

Finally, with my body I will know the physical world through my 5 senses and my trinity is complete.

 

I believe that men and women throughout the ages have chosen one of these three paths when it comes to balancing their spiritual man with their natural man. The extremists will not allow a person to be complete as they do not think that such a balance is possible. Thus, we have Christian preachers who try to tell their converts to stop thinking and to avoid reading philosophers or the hard sciences lest they loose their belif in God. At the same time, you have the intellectual that will tell you that you must deny your spiritual man and the existence of God if you are going to be an enlightened thinker. Men like Aquinas found spirituality and philosophy to not be mutually exclusive.

 

John

[Kuroikaze]

 

Now you just sound like another jack ass claiming to be better than us because you have found some "truth" we are not (and cannot be) privy too, because we are somehow fundamentally flawed human beings who cannot find a balance between rational thought and some "spiritual truth"

 

Sorry, you have this need to stuff me into your world view, so don't expect me to be civil about it. I am quite convinced that my story does not fit any of this, but believe what you like.

 

The point of my entire post was that there is NOT a balance between rational and irrational thought. I nearly drove myself to insanity trying to prove otherwise, and it is quite irritating for you to act as if you act as if you actually have any clue what I went through, much less acting as if a 2,000 year old book of fairy tales speaks directly to my situation.

 

I have already tried that 3rd option you gave, it is why I almost had a nervous break down trying to reconcile the differences in the two world views. There is no balance, one view DOES supplant the other, two contradicting ideas cannot both be true, so when the two philosophies come into conflict (and they will) one must choose which one they will follow.

 

By the way, Aquinas thought heretics should be tortured, so I wouldn't exactly call him an enlightened thinker. Since you are a universalist and a protestant, Aquinas would have had you tied to the rack in order to force you to repent.

[The-Captain]

Kratos this spiritual knowledge of yours, how do you experience it? What form does it take, how do you recognize it as spiritual as opposed to carnal. Im assuming it comes to you in the form of thoughts, thoughts you deem to be special spiritual knowledge, right? Arent you then experiencing that in the same way you experience these carnal, i.e. worldy, knowledge? What makes you so sure that this spiritual knowledge you use to guide your life, base your belief in god, and navigate the bible arent just your thoughts that you externalize and place on a mystical pedestal, so as not to question them and dismiss all examination of them from outside sources?

[Grandpa Harley]

Kratos, I truly recommend anything by Joseph Campbell. It will open your eyes.

It's not on the Christian ministers list... Only clergy I know who've read it are 'odd' (Fr. Richard, Fr. Charlie, Bishop Spong... )

 

OK - Gramps - I'm going to call you on that one. Not only is it on the shelf of my church's pastor, it is also on the reading list of our regional ELCA Lutheran (fairly mainstream) seminary. I know this - because I know the professor of Hebrew Scriptures at that seminary. My guess is - that if it's on their reading list - it's on the reading list of most ELCA Seminaries.

 

Not only that - but within my congregation - we discuss mythology all the time. Just a few Sundays ago - during our contemporary service - we discussed the mythology around the virgin birth story. I'm not saying every ELCA congregation would discuss those things, but our church is not your typical "liberal" church. It's a 150 year-old congregation with a lot of elderly people raised on the traditional theology. They're open minded folks - but they're hardly raving liberals either.

 

It's all relative - Gramps. The whole of Christianity cannot be defined by one individual's experience of it.

 

And is your Pastor 'normal' or does he have a healthy view of the mythology? If he takes it literally, then it may well be on his shelf but it may as well be in Sanskrit with Pali footnotes for all he's absorbed of the text. And it's on a lot of Seminary's reading list, but it's usually only required reading for the 'Biblical Criticism and Scholarship' options... and then for the 201 and higher. Commonly, going on to the 201 Counceling means the origins get forgotten...

 

and they myth of there being a 'Christianity' is underlined by the fact there are so many contradictory sects... there is no 'True' Christian faith, just a set of lies and myths one likes... you like Lutheran lies, so go with your demon god...

[Grandpa Harley]

Kratos: carnal mind as the intellectual part of us

 

I do not understand this at all.

 

That's because it's high church (and high falutin' ) gibberish....

[Kratos]

I do not mean to offend and something is not gibberish just because we do not understand it. I am sure you all know that you are in the vast minority of human beings that have lived or live now in denying the truth of the spirit realm or the spirit of man. Even GH's Paramahansa Yogananda spoke of intuitive knowledge from the spirit.

 

There is a spirit in man and the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding. Some call it rhema from the Greek or an epiphany, but many have experienced receiving a "knowing" that they never arrived at throught the normal means of reasoning and thought.

 

Paul prayed that the eyes of our understanding would be enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but His Father in Heaven revealed it to you.

 

We unconsciously proclaim "I see it" when we receive a flesh of knowing beyond what came through our mental processes.

 

True knowledge of God can only come this way. All other knowledge can be figured out by our flesh and blood minds, but God inspires our spirit with the knowledge of Him. We can reject that spiritual knowledge or talk ourselves out of believing that we ever heard or saw. We can even relegate the knowledge of God as childhood fantasy. That too is our free will choice.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

Yes, but I'd not place you in the same league as Yogananda... and I'm not that great a fan of his... in fact he did spout some not inconsiderable gibberish... and you're using Paul to justify stuff... based on the origin of the text, I call 'gibberish'

 

and the parts of your view I find 'offensive' are the bits where you regard women of 'lower rank' due to Paul ordained excrement, and that the idea that a God who managed to create a universe so damned big that we can't see the edges since the light hasn't arrived from them gives a flying fuck that people can fall in love with members of the same gender... oh, and the doctrine of Original sin... OFFENSIVE...

[Kuroikaze]

I do not mean to offend and something is not gibberish just because we do not understand it.

 

Argumentum ad ignorantiam

I am sure you all know that you are in the vast minority of human beings that have lived or live now in denying the truth of the spirit realm or the spirit of man. Even GH's Paramahansa Yogananda spoke of intuitive knowledge from the spirit.

 

Argumentum ad populum

 

There is a spirit in man and the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding. Some call it rhema from the Greek or an epiphany, but many have experienced receiving a "knowing" that they never arrived at throught the normal means of reasoning and thought.

 

Anecdotal evidence

 

Paul prayed that the eyes of our understanding would be enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but His Father in Heaven revealed it to you.

 

bald assertion, no reliable evidence that this actually happened

 

True knowledge of God can only come this way. All other knowledge can be figured out by our flesh and blood minds, but God inspires our spirit with the knowledge of Him. We can reject that spiritual knowledge or talk ourselves out of believing that we ever heard or saw. We can even relegate the knowledge of God as childhood fantasy. That too is our free will choice.

 

Argumentum ad hominem

 

For someone who claims to respect the "carnal mind" you sure seem to ignore the most basic rules of logic when putting forth an argument.

[Grandpa Harley]

for a nocturnal Arizonian, you pull a damned good fight...

[Kuroikaze]

for a nocturnal Arizonian, you pull a damned good fight...

 

I do my best thinking at 1 a.m. I'm also working on homework for a Japanese class.

[Deva]

We unconsciously proclaim "I see it" when we receive a flesh of knowing beyond what came through our mental processes.

 

True knowledge of God can only come this way. All other knowledge can be figured out by our flesh and blood minds, but God inspires our spirit with the knowledge of Him. We can reject that spiritual knowledge or talk ourselves out of believing that we ever heard or saw. We can even relegate the knowledge of God as childhood fantasy. That too is our free will choice.

 

Am I reading this right? True knowledge of God only comes by flashes of intuition beyond the mental processes?

 

This concept of a human mind (carnal/spiritual) divided into two parts has no basis in reality. Actually from personal experience it seems more like a thousand divisions. If you had never read about the "carnal" mind in the Bible you would never come up with such an idea. You did not receive it as some flash of inspiration of intuitive understanding. You got it from Paul. I would say you contradict yourself by basing your understanding of God NOT on this supposedly innate spiritual inspiration or intuition you are referring to which is purportedly "beyond the mental processes", but by basing it on the words of the Bible.

 

You selectively pull passages from the Bible that sound good to you, for whatever reason you have in your own mind and personality makeup. Among the passages that you like are the ones where Paul talks about Christian marriage. I think that is really unfortunate, and speaks to your views of women, and not in a good way. I don't care what you say about it "not applying" in my case. Even though you say that everyone has a knowledge of God, yet you divide people up into those that have special knowledge, special requirements, and then there are all the rest who don't conform because of their "choice." You are basically saying we all really know God but refuse to acknowledge it. You got this idea from the Bible, not in some intuitive, spiritual way.

 

There is no such thing as "free will choice," because all of our choices are conditioned.

[Open_Minded]

OK - Gramps - I'm going to call you on that one. Not only is it on the shelf of my church's pastor, it is also on the reading list of our regional ELCA Lutheran (fairly mainstream) seminary. I know this - because I know the professor of Hebrew Scriptures at that seminary. My guess is - that if it's on their reading list - it's on the reading list of most ELCA Seminaries.

 

Not only that - but within my congregation - we discuss mythology all the time. Just a few Sundays ago - during our contemporary service - we discussed the mythology around the virgin birth story. I'm not saying every ELCA congregation would discuss those things, but our church is not your typical "liberal" church. It's a 150 year-old congregation with a lot of elderly people raised on the traditional theology. They're open minded folks - but they're hardly raving liberals either.

 

It's all relative - Gramps. The whole of Christianity cannot be defined by one individual's experience of it.

 

And is your Pastor 'normal' or does he have a healthy view of the mythology? If he takes it literally, then it may well be on his shelf but it may as well be in Sanskrit with Pali footnotes for all he's absorbed of the text.

Exactly what do you mean by "normal"?????

 

If he took the mythology literally I'd hardly be sitting in the pews of his church - you should know enough about me by now to know I'd have no time for a literalist pastor.

 

He does not take it literally. In fact, when we were discussing the mythology around the virgin birth story a few Sundays back (during our contemporary service - so everyone was present - it wasn't just a small Bible study) it was our pastor who brought in similar mythology about virgin births. It was our pastor who led a conversation explaining the context of the virgin birth story of Jesus and how these stories were quite common 2000 years ago. It was our pastor who pointed out - that at the time - because these stories were so common - none of Jesus' followers would have read or (in the case of oral tradition) heard them as literally as they are taught in some circles today. The earliest followers of Jesus would have put Jesus' virgin birth stories in context with all the other virgin birth stories of the time and viewed them much differently than they are viewed by literalists today (who don't know - or care - about similar mythologies). That - in fact - was the entire point of the conversation - to talk about the dangers of literalism.

 

And it's on a lot of Seminary's reading list, but it's usually only required reading for the 'Biblical Criticism and Scholarship' options... and then for the 201 and higher. Commonly, going on to the 201 Counceling means the origins get forgotten...

As I said, earlier, Gramps, It's all relative. That is your experience of it. My experience is that every mainstream Lutheran pastor (and Methodist as well) that I work with (and I know many) are well acquainted with Campbell and the mythology of the Bible. It's pretty basic stuff in those circles. I don't claim that my experience of Christianity is the whole of Christianity and that every seminary and every mainstream pastor is aware of these things. But, neither would I go to the extreme of saying that most (if not all) mainstream pastors either don't know - or worse, know and don't care. My guess is that the truth of the matter lies somewhere in middle ground.

[Grandpa Harley]

you're probably correct

 

The bulk of American pastors I've encountered seem to be terribly ill educated but maybe I'm just unlucky...

[SWIM]

Or we could utterly forget about it and move on to better things.

Well - if you can "forget about it" in the world of George W. Bush and Mike Huckabee - more power to you.

 

 

Yeah, it's kinda hard to ignore something you get beat over the head with in private life, and in our gov...

[SWIM]

We've been down this road before, Neo...

 

 

Yes, several times, save your breath Neo...

[SWIM]

you're probably correct

 

The bulk of American pastors I've encountered seem to be terribly ill educated but maybe I'm just unlucky...

 

That too, has been my experience consistantly...

[Grandpa Harley]

Like not knowing what H.H. stands for in things like 'H.H. The Dalai Lama' or 'H.H. Pope John Paul I'...