[kater]

I think it can be both and wouldn't the combination of the two become mythology? An event that has some germ of 'truth' at the time but over time is rewritten to express what individuals believe was the actual purpose rather than as a retelling of events. Could not scripture be the best game ever of chinese whispers :D We use the phrase 'History is written by the winners' and despite the obvious supposed humble beginnings of christianity lets not forget it has survived almost untouched to present day, whereas the Roman empire, amongst others, is dust.

That I think speaks volumes of the single overriding question we all face and that religion speaks to, what is death? In the face of complete uncertainty and the total and seemingly irrevocable change in our form of existence, something so alien to ourselves as to be beyond comprehension, many chose to face uncertainty with certainty even if as Scott says there is no clarity. When there is no path we create one, in order to do all the other things we want and need to do. I remember a Stephen King line that went something like 'The finite mind cannot grasp the infinite' but if we could then I think we'd all be gibbering wrecks, unable to function on any level, so deep down we either avoid the question or when we do ask, we end up coming to a choice that so many have taken before, for comfort and for hope. Because I do think that we are afraid of our own judgement and thus create beings, angels and demons - god and the devil, to make these judgements for us rather than accept we will never know until we get there. I mean whats worse than the end to your entire existence?

[Gary Wassner]

We could adopt a philosophy that embraces life in response, instead of one that looks forward to a hereafter.

Fear and depression definitely lead to God. Contemplation of the infinite provides solace. But why? We feel helpless, and in many respects we are helpless. I suppose that the thought of a higher being guiding us along gives many comfort. But it is just so irrational. And for me to even say that must infuriate many people because my POV in this case would threaten their stability. Hence, faith leads to intolerance, when it, in concept, should do just the opposite! What a tangled web we weave when first.....

[kater]

We could adopt a philosophy that embraces life in response, instead of one that looks forward to a hereafter.

We could but it doesn't 'solve' the problem, which ludicrous or not is what people are looking for. Besides simply enjoying life is far too easy a solution for some people, their fear is too high.


Fear and depression definitely lead to God. Contemplation of the infinite provides solace. But why? We feel helpless, and in many respects we are helpless. I suppose that the thought of a higher being guiding us along gives many comfort. But it is just so irrational. And for me to even say that must infuriate many people because my POV in this case would threaten their stability. Hence, faith leads to intolerance, when it, in concept, should do just the opposite! What a tangled web we weave when first.....

I think that's a large part of the issue and once you choose religion it becomes habitual, a habit to offset the fear of everafter. Go to church on Sundays, listen to the sermon and a few hymns later your one step closer to a nice cushy cloud in heaven. Highly cynical and not entirely accurate (if accuracy is an issue in such a topic) perhaps but it does seem like a quick fix. As for the infinite providing solace, I think that's hardwired into our atavistic core, we all look for a protector who is 'bigger' 'stronger' and can make all the bad things go away, in the case of an omnipotent, omnipresent being we have the ultimate protector. It's a win-win situation and there is an argument for it, if you got to church and there is nothing after life then you haven't lost anything, but if there is a heaven and a hell well you should be quids in.

I also think tribalism plays a part in some aspects, we are always looking to be a part of a group, to share a common identity, power-in-numbers and always when people define themselves as different there is persecution. This forms a stronger form of identity, a greater faith or belief that leads to narrow-mindedness and a 'if-your-not-with-us your-against-us' attitude that festers resentment and even conflict. It is to me entirely divisional and because truth has no real part in it, then we're stuck in an ever-decreasing circle of repetitive, pointless debate.

[Gary Wassner]

I't's not a coincidence that you mentioned a protector, bigger and stronger who will take care of you. Surprise, we call ecclesiastical figures 'father'. That further emphasizes he dependency and the role.

[alison]

For me, the absent father stuff in Christianity (Freud talks about it, as I remember) is more about establishing patriarchal structures of authority in secular society than anything else; hence the strong misogynist subtext in so many of the texts. Why did they slaughter all the Gnostics? What happened to the Sophia, the feminine principle of Wisdom? I must say that these things make me think of religion in these crude terms as a means of crowd control.

That's a bit unfair on the more sophisticated Christian thinkers, though, of which there are more than a few. Faith and doubt are, in their more interesting forms, deeply related and constantly in tension, and honest religious thinkers confront the question of uncertainty as central. I may have mentioned Kierkegaard...

But to take the Bible literally (you must remember I was brought up as an Anglican, and I live in a secular society) seems to me to miss the point by several miles. The meanings of stories - even the sacred meanings - do not depend on their being literally true.

[Tari]

I think the majority of Christians believe that the Bible is indeed a recounting of historical fact, and as such is not fantasy no matter how fantastic are the stories it contains. In any other book a talking donkey, a woman turning to a pillar of salt, or a voice eminating from a burning bush would be fantasy, but since these things are in the Bible they really happened. (In some people's opinions, not mine.) I know people in my family who firmly believe that every event told of in the Bible is indisputable fact, that it happened exactly as described.

There are some catholics/christians (they are two diff groups of pplz) who take the bible as literal and some that take it as metaphorical (i think thats the word?)

But, if an unbeliever were to read the Bible, many of the stories would seem like very imaginitive fantasy!

Myself i live in a house full of catholics yet i dont believe in God and stuff . . . . . . .maybe thats got to do with the fantasy thing? interesting thought really . . . . okay back to answering da statement thing . . . . . i have actually read most of the bible but bcoz i dont believe in it yes i did see it as a darn good fantasy book. the fact that you've read it like that also, Miriamele doesn't surprisde me. it is an excellent story to read and very entertaining.

What is it that allows people to believe in the theoretically impossible when it comes to the Bible? Faith. A lot of people have it, just not me

okay i go to a catholic skool and my friends r catholic and christian and stuff but i personally find it amazing how many people out their name to that particular faith. i mean what makes it more 'better' or 'believeable' than other religions and fatihs?

~ Tari

[Tari]

What is it though about this particular 'fantasy' that has allowed it to endure for so long?

isn't there a religion based on Tolkiens writings? i remember reading ti somewhere? theres people who believe that what tolkien wrote was true as word. they take it seriusly, literally. they think Tolkien was a prophet. yet olkien was catholic was he not? y dont pplz riducule people who believe in tolkien's writings as well as anyone who believes in christ?

~ Tari

[kahnovitch]

(Noah's story is the biggest and most blatant rip off).



I heard that too.
Apparently a lot of ancient Sumerian fantasy literature, has been re-written and treated as gospel.

"Gospel", gotta love that word :rolleyes:

I remember seeing a documetary about "the gospels" which basically said they were handed down stories that were written many years after Christ's glory days, by people who never actually met or even saw Christ "in the flesh" so to speak.

Religion has always been about blind faith.

Personally, I like to keep my eyes open.

[Hereford Eye]

Living is about blind faith. Period.
We blindly believe everyone will stay on their side of the road, will stop at red lights at intersections, will yield the right of way to pedestrians in the crosswalk.
We believe that gas stoves will not leak, electrons exist and power our PCs, that the meat in the grocery stores comes from cows and not horses.
Einstein couldn't make the leap to quantuum mechanics. Does that mean it's wrong or does that mean it's right and he was wrong or does it matter? It works, just like electricity and I know of no one who has seen electricity or can explain how it gets from one end of a wire to another. Doesn't matter; it works.
Once you accept the necessity of blind faith, then how people choose to leap is pretty much their problem. If it works for them, good enough.

[Gary Wassner]

I agree. Blind faith kind of clarifies itself.

What I find so interesting during all of these discussions is that so many fantasy readers are also skeptics when it comes to organized religion. I wonder if there is a real correlation. Maybe we are just so accustomed to reading fantasy and to exploring other worlds, that we gain a different perspective on scripture. It seems little different than some very good fantasy.