Books about Christian mythology for non-Christians?

[smrtmama]

Given OP was asking for sec/non-xtian resources, the thread was hardly directed at xtians!

 

Another example of how non-Christians are expected to steer clear of any thread labeled CC, but (some) Christians seem to have no problems coming into a thread that is specifically labeled as non-Christian and complaining about the content.

[Haiku]

But when it's not, I tend to object to it myself, unless there has been a clear request from a non-Christian to a Christian to clarify their own beliefs.

 

I've been a non-Christian in this country for close to 40 years. I am not targeting you personally with my comments, but my experience has been that while very few Christians will say that they treat non-Christians negatively or speak about their religions in a derogatory way, in general they do. My personal opinion is that Christians in this country need to be more honest with themselves about the level of anti-non-Christian bias in this country and the ways in which non-Christians are treated by Christians. I am sure this is not a popular opinion or one that is considered polite to express, but I can hardly stand to see Christians crying foul after living through what I have lived through as a non-Christian in this country.

 

It's like all the white people who simply don't/don't want to see institutional racism. There is institutional anti-non-Christian bias in this country.

 

Tara

[Carol in Cal.]

Given OP was asking for sec/non-xtian resources, the thread was hardly directed at xtians!

 

I disagree.

 

Who more so than a Christian would have sorted through all those children's Bibles?

 

I recommend secular methods of learning about Christianity all the time. I can do that because of my respect for other family's authority over their own children, and desire to answer their questions politely. But I am Christian. Most of the time, it's other Christians that answer those questions as well, I think.

 

If someone doesn't want to hear from Christians, they could maybe state another affinity. Like, "Hey other Martians, what do you use to teach the Bible story part of Western Civ?" See what I mean?

 

When I saw the original post, the wording of the post itself was completely inoffensive, but the use of the word myth or mythology (I forget now which one it was) in the title did give me a little pause. I'm not offended by the OP, but I was maybe a little hurt--normally I would not have commented on that, but I did join the discussion, on the late side, because of how it had progressed.

[smrtmama]

I disagree.

 

Who more so than a Christian would have sorted through all those children's Bibles?

 

I recommend secular methods of learning about Christianity all the time. I can do that because of my respect for other family's authority over their own children, and desire to answer their questions politely. But I am Christian. Most of the time, it's other Christians that answer those questions as well, I think.

 

If someone doesn't want to hear from Christians, they could maybe state another affinity. Like, "Hey other Martians, what do you use to teach the Bible story part of Western Civ?" See what I mean?

 

When I saw the original post, the wording of the post itself was completely inoffensive, but the use of the word myth or mythology (I forget now which one it was) in the title did give me a little pause. I'm not offended by the OP, but I was maybe a little hurt--normally I would not have commented on that, but I did join the discussion, on the late side, because of how it had progressed.

 

Why should someone have to identify their own set of beliefs? Secular or "Non-christian" should be sufficient to receive an answer.

[Carol in Cal.]

I've been a non-Christian in this country for close to 40 years. I am not targeting you personally with my comments, but my experience has been that while very few Christians will say that they treat non-Christians negatively or speak about their religions in a derogatory way, in general they do. My personal opinion is that Christians in this country need to be more honest with themselves about the level of anti-non-Christian bias in this country and the ways in which non-Christians are treated by Christians. I am sure this is not a popular opinion or one that is considered polite to express, but I can hardly stand to see Christians crying foul after living through what I have lived through as a non-Christian in this country.

 

It's like all the white people who simply don't/don't want to see institutional racism. There is institutional anti-non-Christian bias in this country.

 

Tara

 

 

As a Christian in California, my experience is much the same (lots of sort of unconscious anti-Christian bias), and I agree that it is unpleasant.

 

I would not personally equate it with the effects of having blinders on about institutional racism, which I think is far more corrosive, but I do think that it's a pretty good illustration, albeit a more extreme one.

[nmoira]

Who more so than a Christian would have sorted through all those children's Bibles?

Perhaps me, looking for suitable materials for my family? You wanna check with my librarian? ;)

[Corraleno]

As a Christian, if I were asking about another faith, I would be especially careful to do so respectfully. And I appreciate it when others show my faith the same kind of respect.

 

Actually, I frequently see people here refer to the "false gods" of other faiths.

 

Even if the OP's use of the term "mythology" demonstrated that she didn't believe Biblical stories were literally true, why should that be offensive to those who do believe? More than two-thirds of the Earth's population would consider the Christian Bible to be "mythological" ~ are the beliefs of those 4 billion people "offensive" to Christians? :confused:

 

Jackie

[LizzyBee]

Another example of how non-Christians are expected to steer clear of any thread labeled CC, but (some) Christians seem to have no problems coming into a thread that is specifically labeled as non-Christian and complaining about the content.

 

The CC designation was requested so that non-Christians could avoid posts about Christian topics if they desired, not to exclude non-Christians from the discussions. It originated on the old boards when many people still had dial-up and didn't want to open posts only to find Christian content in which they were not interested.

[smrtmama]

Perhaps me, looking for suitable materials for my family? You wanna check with my librarian? ;)

 

Also, she didn't say "children's Bibles." She said books of Bible stories. My kids don't have Bibles and won't be getting Bibles, but they've read some Bible stories.

[Carol in Cal.]

Why should someone have to identify their own set of beliefs? Secular or "Non-christian" should be sufficient to receive an answer.

 

It was just a suggestion.

 

But if they want to exclude Christians from reading, commenting about, or answering, the best way to do that is to indicate a specific target group from which they want to draw their answers.

 

Lots of Christians are familiar with secular resources and recommend them. I am one of them. If I have offended anyone by doing so, I am not aware of it.

[smrtmama]

The CC designation was requested so that non-Christians could avoid posts about Christian topics if they desired, not to exclude non-Christians from the discussions. It originated on the old boards when many people still had dial-up and didn't want to open posts only to find Christian content in which they were not interested.

 

However it originated, it is now very obviously (to us secular homeschoolers) used to exclude non-Christian viewpoints from a conversation. I have personally been told in threads that I shouldn't have gotten involved in a conversation clearly labeled CC, or that non-Christian viewpoints really aren't welcome in those threads.

[Daisy]

Sorry, I'm directing this to Christians within a non-christian thread. Please forgive...

 

Here's a question for the Christians.

 

If the OP **HAD** meant the post to be completely and totally offensive (I don't think she did), what would have been the CHRISTIAN response?

 

That is what I don't understand. Since when are we crusaders for correct speech towards Christians and our beliefs? We are witnesses of an event that we believe to be historically true. We share our faith and that's it. We don't cram it down people's throats. We don't demand recognition. We don't demand rights. We don't demand that they give it respect or call it what we wish them to call it. Our job is simply to share the Good News and live like we believe it.

 

So why are we getting upset that some people refer to the Scriptures as mythology? To them that is what it is. They are still welcome at my table. Welcome to debate the merits of Singapore math versus MUS over a cup of tea.

 

I can't imagine one single person has EVER become a convert to Christianity by being browbeaten, treated with contempt, or been told they were offensive. It sure as heck wouldn't have made me even the slightest bit interested in reading Bible stories to my kids.

[smrtmama]

It was just a suggestion.

 

But if they want to exclude Christians from reading, commenting about, or answering, the best way to do that is to indicate a specific target group from which they want to draw their answers.

 

Lots of Christians are familiar with secular resources and recommend them. I am one of them. If I have offended anyone by doing so, I am not aware of it.

 

She did identify her target group. She said "non-Christians."

[Carol in Cal.]

Also, she didn't say "children's Bibles." She said books of Bible stories. My kids don't have Bibles and won't be getting Bibles, but they've read some Bible stories.

 

The title said 'Christian mythology' and that phrase is, as demonstrated in this thread, offensive to a lot of people. There was nothing in the post that I would have objected to, and, really, even though the title gave me pause, I would not have commented on it except that I saw that the thread had gone in the way that it has.

[smrtmama]

Sorry, I'm directing this to Christians within a non-christian thread. Please forgive...

 

Here's a question for the Christians.

 

If the OP **HAD** meant the post to be completely and totally offensive (I don't think she did), what would have been the CHRISTIAN response?

 

That is what I don't understand. Since when are we crusaders for correct speech towards Christians and our beliefs? We are witnesses of an event that we believe to be historically true. We share our faith and that's it. We don't cram it down people's throats. We don't demand recognition. We don't demand rights. We don't demand that they give it respect or call it what we wish them to call it. Our job is simply to share the Good News and live like we believe it.

 

So why are we getting upset that some people refer to the Scriptures as mythology? To them that is what it is. They are still welcome at my table. Welcome to debate the merits of Singapore math versus MUS over a cup of tea.

 

I can't imagine one single person has EVER become a convert to Christianity by being browbeaten, treated with contempt, or been told they were offensive. It sure as heck wouldn't have made me even the slightest bit interested in reading Bible stories to my kids.

 

:grouphug:

 

Daisy, you are a delight and a joy. Thank you for showing that someone can both have strong religious beliefs and a willingness to accept that not everyone else feels the same way (or is trying to insult you personally by not feeling the same way).

[nmoira]

 

Daisy, you are a delight and a joy.

I heartily concur. :D

[Carol in Cal.]

She did identify her target group. She said "non-Christians."

 

She wanted resources to be used in a secular or non-Christian home. Kind like the difference between a noun of direct address and an adjective modifying an object of a preposition.

 

And, really, it was not so bad. Again, I would not have commented on the original post alone, and I am sorry that this thread has become kind of a lightning rod to some extent.

 

I'm just suggesting a more gentle way to ask the same question. Directing it to a specific, non-Christian affinity group, or only using the term Bible stories and not using the term mythology would have made this more palatable to me and to, I think, a lot of other people on this board.

 

No one is going to be the police for this and insist on it, but I think that I and others have the right to express this view, particularly if we do it politely and mildly which I believe I have done.

[Corraleno]

:grouphug:

 

Daisy, you are a delight and a joy. Thank you for showing that someone can both have strong religious beliefs and a willingness to accept that not everyone else feels the same way (or is trying to insult you personally by not feeling the same way).

 

:iagree:

 

Jackie

[Carol in Cal.]

Here's a question for the Christians.

 

If the OP **HAD** meant the post to be completely and totally offensive (I don't think she did), what would have been the CHRISTIAN response?

 

That is what I don't understand. Since when are we crusaders for correct speech towards Christians and our beliefs? We are witnesses of an event that we believe to be historically true. We share our faith and that's it. We don't cram it down people's throats. We don't demand recognition. We don't demand rights. We don't demand that they give it respect or call it what we wish them to call it. Our job is simply to share the Good News and live like we believe it.

 

So why are we getting upset that some people refer to the Scriptures as mythology? To them that is what it is. They are still welcome at my table. Welcome to debate the merits of Singapore math versus MUS over a cup of tea.

 

I can't imagine one single person has EVER become a convert to Christianity by being browbeaten, treated with contempt, or been told they were offensive. It sure as heck wouldn't have made me even the slightest bit interested in reading Bible stories to my kids.

 

That's why I would not have commented on the original post.

However, when I saw that others were arguing that no one would reasonably be offended by the term Christian mythology, I felt like I needed to say that I disagreed with that.

[MelanieM]

When someone says something that is clearly directed to other Christians, they should be polite, but they can also express their mutual beliefs I think.

 

 

Actually, I wasn't at all directing my question to Christians. I rather suspected that the most relevant suggestions would come from non-Christians. I assumed that most Christians are getting their biblical information from the bible and decidedly Christian materials, which wasn't really what I was asking for.

 

Either way, I still don't see where I've said anything wrong or impolite. If people use the term mythology with negative intent when they speak of other religions, that has nothing to do with *my* use of the term. As has been discussed here, mythology isn't a dirty word. It is neutral and, by definition, fits the discussion.

 

But let's even push that aside for a moment. Let's just assume I have adopted the use of the word "myth" to mean something that is not fact-based truth. I am obviously not Christian, and therefore those stories are not considered literal truths to me, so what's the problem with me calling them mythology, even by that definition? What difference does *my* belief about the subject make to anyone else?

 

If it's acceptable to say Greek or Norse or Hindu mythology, then I really can't see why there's a problem with the term Christian mythology.

[nmoira]

If it's acceptable to say Greek or Norse or Hindu mythology, then I really can't see why there's a problem with the term Christian mythology.

 

:lurk5:

[Carol in Cal.]

Actually, I wasn't at all directing my question to Christians. I rather suspected that the most relevant suggestions would come from non-Christians. I assumed that most Christians are getting their biblical information from the bible and decidedly Christian materials, which wasn't really what I was asking for.

 

Either way, I still don't see where I've said anything wrong or impolite. If people use the term mythology with negative intent when they speak of other religions, that has nothing to do with *my* use of the term. As has been discussed here, mythology isn't a dirty word. It is neutral and, by definition, fits the discussion.

 

But let's even push that aside for a moment. Let's just assume I have adopted the use of the word "myth" to mean something that is not fact-based truth. I am obviously not Christian, and therefore those stories are not considered literal truths to me, so what's the problem with me calling them mythology, even by that definition? What difference does *my* belief about the subject make to anyone else?

 

If it's acceptable to say Greek or Norse or Hindu mythology, then I really can't see why there's a problem with the term Christian mythology.

 

I would not say Hindu or Moslem or Jewish or Buddhist mythology on this board, because I believe that the most common usage of the word mythology would lead to my saying that being received as an aspersion on that religion, and because that religion is active today. It's different with Norse mythology as I am not aware of anyone who accepts it as their faith at this time. If I found out differently, I would change that usage as well.

 

You're free, clearly, to use the less common but more scholarly meaning of the word mythology in your everyday language. I'm familiar with that usage, and have read the C. S. Lewis passages that SpyCar quotes as well. Who am I to tell you not to? But if you choose to do that, you have to also accept that some will receive it badly or be a little hurt by it.

 

It's reasonable to exercise your freedom, and just like it is not for me to tell you what to do, it is not for anyone to tell others how to feel.

 

And, if someone specifically doesn't want input from Christians, the easiest way to avoid it is to say so, either explicitly or by asking for input from 'others who prefer to teach Bible stories as myths' ... oh wait...:001_smile: (Kidding!)

 

Really, truly, I am sorry that this conversation has gotten attached to your post. It's moved on to a larger issue, and that's the only reason I got involved. I didn't have enough of a problem with your post to feel that I had to comment on it to start with.

[Corraleno]

The title said 'Christian mythology' and that phrase is, as demonstrated in this thread, offensive to a lot of people.

 

What I don't get is why it should be seen as offensive for a non-Christian to express non-belief in the Christian Bible? Wouldn't it be pretty self-evident than a non-Christian would see biblical stories as myths, just as Christians would see Hindu or Buddhist stories as myths?

 

Is it not a double standard for Christians to object to their beliefs being referred to as myths by non-Christians, while frequently referring to the deities of other faiths as "false gods"?

 

Jackie

[Jen+4dc]

Here's a question for the Christians.

 

If the OP **HAD** meant the post to be completely and totally offensive (I don't think she did), what would have been the CHRISTIAN response?

 

That is what I don't understand. Since when are we crusaders for correct speech towards Christians and our beliefs? We are witnesses of an event that we believe to be historically true. We share our faith and that's it. We don't cram it down people's throats. We don't demand recognition. We don't demand rights. We don't demand that they give it respect or call it what we wish them to call it. Our job is simply to share the Good News and live like we believe it.

 

So why are we getting upset that some people refer to the Scriptures as mythology? To them that is what it is. They are still welcome at my table. Welcome to debate the merits of Singapore math versus MUS over a cup of tea.

 

I can't imagine one single person has EVER become a convert to Christianity by being browbeaten, treated with contempt, or been told they were offensive. It sure as heck wouldn't have made me even the slightest bit interested in reading Bible stories to my kids.

(empahsis mine)

 

I totally agree with Daisy. As a Christian, a home schooler, a mom, an adult, a person, a human, etc. etc. I did not find the title or the content of the original post at all offensive. It seemed to me like an honest question in a format that should have been open to such questions. Why it got to be such a debate, I have no idea!:001_huh: If you find the title of a thread offensive, why open it at all?:confused:

 

Just my 2 cents. No offense intended to Christians or non-Christians!:D

 

OP, I hope you find something that works for your family.

[Carol in Cal.]

Perhaps me, looking for suitable materials for my family? You wanna check with my librarian? ;)

 

In addition to Powells??? You lucky woman, you!

 

(LOVE Powell's. Just LOVE it.)

[MelanieM]

I keep cross-posting with lots of interesting comments I want to reply to! All these children really need to leave me alone so I can get the the important stuff here at the hive! ;) So a couple of quick things...

 

Daisy, I think you are an absolute delight! I was telling my husband about this conversation earlier, and I used your first post on this thread as an example of someone that makes me appreciate, and want to learn more about, Christianity. (Loved that scripture quote about taking offense! It's a premise I try to live my life by.) And apparently, you just keep getting better! So thanks for your posts. :D

 

Carol, I am getting the impression that you might be concerned that I think *you* think my post is worse than what it is. (Horrible sentence! I hope that makes sense.) No worries. I appreciate your input and am not at all upset or put out by your comments. Just so ya know. ;) (I actually very, very rarely get offended by anything. Maybe that's why I can't understand when people seem to so easily get offended!)

 

For what it's worth, I didn't intend for the thread to exclude anyone, and nor do I think that should be necessary. But I do think asking for a non-Christian resource sends a pretty clear message that I'm not coming at it from a Christian perspective. I don't think any Christians can say they entered this thread without fair warning in that regard.

 

What I don't get is why it should be seen as offensive for a non-Christian to express non-belief in the Christian Bible? Wouldn't it be pretty self-evident than a non-Christian would see biblical stories as myths, just as Christians would see Hindu or Buddhist stories as myths?

 

Is it not a double standard for Christians to object to their beliefs being referred to as myths by non-Christians, while frequently referring to the deities of other faiths as "false gods"?

 

Jackie

 

This question keeps getting asked, and none of the offended parties have yet stepped up to answer it. I'm really, really, really interested in a response to this. Any takers? Anyone?

 

Thanks to everyone, Christian and non-Christian, who has chimed in with suggestions and words of support confirming I'm not a horrible Christian basher. ;)

Edited February 4, 2010 by MelanieM

[Saille]

Actually, I frequently see people here refer to the "false gods" of other faiths.

 

Even if the OP's use of the term "mythology" demonstrated that she didn't believe Biblical stories were literally true, why should that be offensive to those who do believe? More than two-thirds of the Earth's population would consider the Christian Bible to be "mythological" ~ are the beliefs of those 4 billion people "offensive" to Christians? :confused:

 

Jackie

 

That's the whole point, isn't it? For the poster of the original comment and those who are still arguing about it, the answer is *yes*. And that is not appropriate. The mere implication that others might not believe in your deity is NOT an offense against you. Period. What you're being told is that folks who are not part of the dominant religious group in this country would not get by for long with such a thin skin.

 

The comment that sparked all this was an angry 30-second smackdown. Had I posted it, I'd have expected admin response.

[Carol in Cal.]

What I don't get is why it should be seen as offensive for a non-Christian to express non-belief in the Christian Bible? Wouldn't it be pretty self-evident than a non-Christian would see biblical stories as myths, just as Christians would see Hindu or Buddhist stories as myths?

 

Is it not a double standard for Christians to object to their beliefs being referred to as myths by non-Christians, while frequently referring to the deities of other faiths as "false gods"?

 

Jackie

 

I don't think that anyone is saying that it's offensive for a non-Christian to express non-belief in the Christian Bible. The issue is not that. And, yes, in fact, it is self-evident and not offensive that a non-Christian would see Bible stories as myths.

 

The issue, I think, is one of assumption and address rather than belief. I'm going to try an analogy. (treading carefully)

 

OK, so Martians believe in a cult of water worship. Their central belief is that everyone should grok. Their central greeting, religiously and socially is 'May you never thirst.'

 

So here I am, familiar with their beliefs, visiting with the Martian ambassador to the interplanetary UN, and I say, "I want to expose my children to your beliefs even though I don't share them. It's culturally beneficial for us to all understand each other better. Do you have a resource that you can suggest that presents these, but doesn't try to persuade them to accept them?" OK, that was maybe a little blunt, but basically polite and probably not hurtful. And I'll bet he would give me some great suggestions!

 

But if I ask a broad audience, the whole UN if you will, "What resources should I use to present untrue Martian beliefs to my children in a way that won't try to proselytize them?" Then everyone hears me ASSUME and STATE AS FACT that the beliefs are untrue, because that is inherent in my question. And that could be hurtful or insulting to the Martian.

 

Maybe, though, I could ask other UN people who share my beliefs in the Plutonian god of cold to comment on this. Like, "Hey, Plutonians, have any of you ever tried to present Martian beliefs to your children? What resources did you use to teach them accurately but not have to deal with embedded attempts to proselytize them?" So that's not directing right at the Martian a belief that insults him, it's starting an internal conversation within another group.

 

Another alternative would be to address the whole UN, including the Martians, by saying something like, "What resources that don't proselytize can I use to familiarize my family with Martian culture and beliefs?" and that sounds like I'm building bridges between cultures.

 

So what I am suggesting is that either the assumption that the beliefs are wrong not be included in the question, or that the audience be more carefully chosen. It's fine not to believe the same thing, but it hurts and can insult to imply that no one else should do so either. That's all.

 

And, frankly, this wasn't that bad a post to start with! Really!!! I'm just trying to explain things here, not to attack at all.

 

(Aside: Lest this go around in circles, I stipulate that the OP did not mean to use the term mythological in that way--I understand that. That's another matter--it's not the intent, it's what people hear.)

[Haiku]

A while back there was a thread about Christians referring to non-Christians as unbelievers. A lot of the Christians were claiming that the term "unbeliever" had a specific Christian meaning and that it wasn't meant to be offensive and non-Christians should not be insulted by its use.

 

Now here come the Christians claiming that people who use the term "mythology" in its specific religious context are being offensive and should not use such loaded language.

 

Apparently if it's an offensive Christian term it's fine but if it's an offensive all-purpose term it's not?

 

:confused:

 

Tara

[MelanieM]

Ok, I am groking the martians at the UN where they worship their water god and shout out "may you never thirst!" to each other all day. Coolio! lol!

 

But I think you forgot one piece... Let's assume the martians use the term phlubber to refer to belief systems of their non-martian cousins, and some martians even use that same term to refer to their own belief systems as well. Then one non-martian, who uses this very familiar term phlubber for *all* belief systems, says "can anyone suggestion some martian phlubber that my kids might enjoy?" What's the appropriate way for the martians to handle that? Do they A) skin the non-believer alive B) engage in an interesting discussion around the misuse of the term phlubber C) lament about the sad state of affairs the martian world is coming to D) send a "may you never thirst" blessing to the non-believer or E) all of the above?

 

Don't answer. Really.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

late coming in, and commenting on a post way back, but here goes:

 

RE: MythBusters (my boys have watched almost every episode via NetFlicks, and I with them)

 

They do not refer to "Myth" as something untrue. They refer to "Myth" as a story that is widely circulated and believed to be true by many.

 

They MythBusters crew puts the "Myth" to the test. Sometimes the "Myth" is busted (a snowplow cannot cause a car to flip off the road just by passing in the opposite direction at freeway speed).

Sometimes the "Myth" is true (Mentos do cause Diet Coke to spurt up like a fountain... they found out just what ingredients make the chemical reaction).

 

So there: Even in popular reality-show media, "Myth" does not equal "Untrue"

[Mom-ninja.]

Thanks to everyone, Christian and non-Christian, who has chimed in with suggestions and words of support confirming I'm not a horrible Christian basher.

 

You may not be a Christian basher, but Spy Car is a barbarian basher.

 

 

(pssst, ;))

[Spy Car]

I don't think that anyone is saying that it's offensive for a non-Christian to express non-belief in the Christian Bible. The issue is not that. And, yes, in fact, it is self-evident and not offensive that a non-Christian would see Bible stories as myths.

 

The point is that Christian myths are myths. They are sacred stories. They are sacred stories whether one believes they are figuratively true, literally true, or not true.

 

But the term "Myth" properly used, the way academics, scholars, and well-educated people of all stripes have always used the term, carries no true/false associations.

 

Once again the definition of Myth from the Oxford English Dictionary:

 

"A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology*, or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon."

 

Bill

[Saille]

But if I ask a broad audience, the whole UN if you will, "What resources should I use to present untrue Martian beliefs to my children in a way that won't try to proselytize them?" Then everyone hears me ASSUME and STATE AS FACT that the beliefs are untrue, because that is inherent in my question. And that could be hurtful or insulting to the Martian.

 

This is exactly what I'm cross about, though. The above is presented as something that could have been handled more sensitively. It looks like it's your example of a situation analogous to this thread, correct?

 

Now, imagine someone going to the UN, telling all the Martians to cover their ears, and saying, "I am concerned that sharing Martian beliefs with my children, even in a strict context of cultural literacy, will lead them into iniquity."

 

That happened, on another thread on this board, *this week*. And that is an extremely old conversation on this board, one most members have seen repeatedly. The people who found that offensive sucked it up. No one came in and posted a vituperous, self-focused comment without answering the OP's question. So why do people get to make such a big deal about *this thread*? No one has answered that question yet.

[Carol in Cal.]

Now, imagine someone going to the UN, telling all the Martians to cover their ears, and saying, "I am concerned that sharing Martian beliefs with my children, even in a strict context of cultural literacy, will lead them into iniquity."

 

So why do people get to make such a big deal about *this thread*? No one has answered that question yet.

 

I did, earlier.

 

 

 

I think it's because the beliefs questioned in the old thread are stipulated by everyone to be untrue. But those in this one are not. That's what I meant when I talked about Norse myths earlier. And I also said, earlier in this thread, that if there were a bunch of people posting here who actually believed Norse stories, I would not refer to them in the same manner.

[Carol in Cal.]

The point is that Christian myths are myths. They are sacred stories. They are sacred stories whether one believes they are figuratively true, literally true, or not true.

 

But the term "Myth" properly used, the way academics, scholars, and well-educated people of all stripes have always used the term, carries no true/false associations.

 

 

 

And I'm familiar with that usage, but aren't you also familiar with the 'common' usage of myth as an ancient fictional story about non-existent beings?

 

I'm in my early 50's, and the scholarly usage for the word myth is something that I didn't hear at all until college, and have never heard as common usage. So I think that it's fine to use the scholarly term in the scholarly way, but if you do, you have to accept the fact that many, many people, probably most people in the US, will assume that you intend the common usage. You don't have to change your way of talking to suit that, but the fact is that that is how most will 'hear' it, and it's good to be aware of that.

[Carol in Cal.]

Ok, I am groking the martians at the UN where they worship their water god and shout out "may you never thirst!" to each other all day. Coolio! lol!

 

But I think you forgot one piece... Let's assume the martians use the term phlubber to refer to belief systems of their non-martian cousins, and some martians even use that same term to refer to their own belief systems as well. Then one non-martian, who uses this very familiar term phlubber for *all* belief systems, says "can anyone suggestion some martian phlubber that my kids might enjoy?" What's the appropriate way for the martians to handle that? Do they A) skin the non-believer alive B) engage in an interesting discussion around the misuse of the term phlubber C) lament about the sad state of affairs the martian world is coming to D) send a "may you never thirst" blessing to the non-believer or E) all of the above?

 

Don't answer. Really.

 

 

May you never thirst!

[Carol in Cal.]

I believe understand the arguments on all sides. I believe I could state them all myself, to the satisfaction of those who I have disagreed with.

 

We don't all have to agree.

 

I would love it if we all at least could understand each other. I'm trying to do that and to translate a bit. I don't know whether that has been successful or not, but I have addressed every question that I have seen in this thread, as mildly and clearly as I can, and I am going to bow out now.

 

May you never thirst!!!

[IsabelC]

I want to convert to that religion! I'm sick of all the earth phlubber!:tongue_smilie:

[Saille]

the beliefs questioned in the old thread are stipulated by everyone to be untrue. But those in this one are not

 

But that argument is erroneous. The beliefs questioned in the old thread are stipulated by some to be untrue, just as the beliefs in this one are stipulated by some to be untrue. I propose that this is an issue of the larger population asserting that their belief is more true than the minority belief.

[Caitilin]

I think it's because the beliefs questioned in the old thread are stipulated by everyone to be untrue. But those in this one are not. That's what I meant when I talked about Norse myths earlier. And I also said, earlier in this thread, that if there were a bunch of people posting here who actually believed Norse stories, I would not refer to them in the same manner.

 

 

But, the fact is that there ARE people on this board RIGHT NOW who do, in fact worship and regard as true the myths or sacred stories of the Norse, the Ancient Greeks and Romans, and various other cultures. They may not be posting in this thread, perhaps because they fear being treated dismissively, who knows, whatever, but there ARE people on this thread who are not Christian and do have specific religious beliefs. It's just simply not the case that there is a general consensus that, say, the Norse sacred stories are not true, if by that you mean that everyone agrees. There are several vocal pagans of various sorts on the board who have expressed various aspects of their religious practice, and they are definitely serious about their belief systems. Thus, it IS improper to refer to any of humanity's sacred stories dismissively, if one is truly concerned with not offending one's fellow beings.

 

And, FTR, I am a Christian who fully understood and appreciated the meaning that the OP was giving to the term "myth" at my first reading and took no offense--it hardly seems likely that I was the only one either. I am on Team SpyCar for this one! :D

[Spy Car]

And I'm familiar with that usage, but aren't you also familiar with the 'common' usage of myth as an ancient fictional story about non-existent beings?

 

No. That is not the way well-educated people understand the term myth.

 

I do understand that some people use "myth" as a synonym for false-hood, just as I understand some people pluralize cat's by adding an apostrophe.

 

I'm in my early 50's, and the scholarly usage for the word myth is something that I didn't hear at all until college, and have never heard as common usage.

 

Your lack of exposure to people who understand the long established definitions of myth and mythology prior to college, or since, is regrettable. However, it doesn't alter the fact that well-educated people understand the correct meaning of the term.

 

So I think that it's fine to use the scholarly term in the scholarly way, but if you do, you have to accept the fact that many, many people, probably most people in the US, will assume that you intend the common usage. You don't have to change your way of talking to suit that, but the fact is that that is how most will 'hear' it, and it's good to be aware of that.

 

You know, sometimes you can't help the things peoples lack of knowledge will cause them to believe or confuse. Ignorance is a terrible thing. But this is a forum that serves as a guide to "Classical Education." We ought to aim a little higher.

 

Bill

[Saille]

I would love it if we all at least could understand each other. I'm trying to do that and to translate a bit.

 

Carol: I appreciate it. I do. My issue is not that I don't get it, my issue is that I don't think this is a disagreement about terminology. Or rather, it is now, but it didn't start out that way. It started out as someone getting very defensive because the OP chose wording that did not lend more authority to the Bible than to other deity stories. The language came directly from another thread in which no one questioned the word usage at all, despite the fact that people on this board hold the deities of other mythological stories sacred. My impression is that there are some folks responding, "But they shouldn't!" Fine. That's a matter of opinion, and we're all entitled to our opinions. That's something to reflect on. It does not, however, entitle someone to storm into the thread, pitch a fit, and storm out. There's no amount of "translating", however well intentioned, that's going to fix that, nor should you have to try to fix it at all. The discussion is not ongoing because we're disagreeing about what mythology is or isn't. The discussion is ongoing because we're disagreeing about whose religion is real and whose isn't. The subtext of the argument is that Christianity is more legitimate than other belief systems, not just in the souls of the faithful, but in practice, on this board.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I like the DK style retellings by Selina Hastings. It covers most of the stories in the Bible, even the ones that are of people being foolish and having consequences, that often don't make it into the average Bible storybook (ex, David & Bathsheba, Baalam.) I think that these are lovely books that are well written and add a lot through the use of the sidebar photos and maps.

 

FWIW, many of the retellings of other myths or fairy tales don't spend a lot of time on disclaimers.

 

I wanted to add that I think this has been published in several formats. Hastings is the author listed for the DK Children's Illustrated Bible. I have two volumes published by Hermes House as The Children's Illustrated Bible The Old Testament and The Children's Illustrated Bible The New Testament. There also seems to be a collection of stories (David & Goliath and others, Jesus, Noah's Ark and others) that are probably taken from the CIB. I scanned the copy that I have and while it presents the background of the Bible (what Christians hold it to be, how many books, about when it was written, etc) it is done in a third person style similar to what I would expect in a book about the Illiad (Homer wrote the Illiad to describe the Trojan War, a long war between the city of Troy and the Greeks in which even the Gods took sides. Just as an example.) I think that the Hastings book is probably in many libraries, so maybe you could check it out before you use it or not.

Edited February 4, 2010 by Sebastian (a lady)

[nmoira]

In addition to Powells??? You lucky woman, you!

 

(LOVE Powell's. Just LOVE it.)

 

We're doubly blessed. :D

 

November 20, 2009

PORTLAND, OR – In its second annual assessment, the national library publication Library Journal has again awarded Multnomah County Library a five star rating — the highest ranking possible.

 

The LJ Index of Public Library Services ranks libraries based on four per capita output measures: visits, circulation, program attendance and public Internet computer use. When compared with other large urban library systems in the U.S., Multnomah County Library was ranked #1 in circulation per capita once again, based on data compiled by the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

[Spy Car]

late coming in, and commenting on a post way back, but here goes:

 

RE: MythBusters (my boys have watched almost every episode via NetFlicks, and I with them)

 

They do not refer to "Myth" as something untrue. They refer to "Myth" as a story that is widely circulated and believed to be true by many.

 

They MythBusters crew puts the "Myth" to the test. Sometimes the "Myth" is busted (a snowplow cannot cause a car to flip off the road just by passing in the opposite direction at freeway speed).

Sometimes the "Myth" is true (Mentos do cause Diet Coke to spurt up like a fountain... they found out just what ingredients make the chemical reaction).

 

So there: Even in popular reality-show media, "Myth" does not equal "Untrue"

 

But whether Mentos interacts with Diet Coke (or not) has nothing to do with explaining the creation of the world, how mankind, the animals, and the natural world came to be, or how any of this is tried into a Creator-God.

 

These latter questions are the providence of Myth. Chemical reactions are not.

 

That a story is widely believed (or not) is entirely irrelevant to the story being a "myth" if the story in question doesn't speak to the origins of humankind and our relationships to the divine.

 

Bill

[Julie in MN]

Well, hello everyone. So many comments. Since it seems that the majority of the 10 pages of replies here are talking to "me" rather than to the OP, I suppose I ought to respond. In order to make this as brief as possible, I'll reply in groups.

 

1. To those who understood my original post (where I voted that such a conversation belonged on the "general" board), thank you for speaking up for me. We seem to be a small minority on this thread. I am truly aware you had to face a verbal firing squad in order to say you had any thought in common with mine.

 

2. To those who are Christians and offended by my brief post, thank you for attempting to show the OP that you are a loving Christian. I feel you are all also intimating that I am not a loving Christian, and I'm not sure how that helps the OP. I've found it impossible to see the "browbeating" I've been accused of. However, I'll accept that we Christians are all different. God created us that way, I think.

 

3. To those who are discussing the detailed vocabulary of the situation, I totally understand all of the discussion on that. I guess personally I would not start a post referring to, for instance, Muslim mythology. I would feel it clearly rude, despite the word origins. I think someone might even object! But I do enjoy word discussions...

 

4. To those who feel led to vent that all Christians on the board have long been annoying them and by association with this stereotype I have been annoying them, I am amazed that my little request seems that hugely offensive. I didn't post a long vent. I didn't demand that the conversation not be allowed. I didn't say anything about "your" beliefs or anyone else's. I can't think of any time that I've posted about any of the various things being vented about. I'm clueless about what "other posts" are being referred to. I simply stated my reason that the topic might be moved to the general board. I think the number of non-curriculum responses suggests I might have been right -- but out-voted nonetheless :)

 

5. To those who feel I should not have opened the post or I should not have been thin-skinned about the post, etc., here is what happened. I read the title of the OP. I felt the post belonged on the general board. I had to open the post in order to say that. I felt I should state my reason. My day got busy. The thread became more of a "general board" discussion, which I avoid. That's all that happened.

 

6. To the OP and those in agreement with the OP, I admit I am still skeptical about two things which I originally didn't think were my place to say.

(a) If you truly wanted knowledge of the Christian religion, surely there are thousands of Bibles available to you, all practically identical so reviews/previews would hardly be needed, but are available freely on Amazon. Instead, I still see the OP as looking for something that plucks out the particular pieces of the Bible that might be used for the express purpose of convincing your child that the Bible is "mythology." That still feels like something I would raise my hand and request moved to the general board.

(b) There seems to be some implication that Christianity is the overbearing majority surrounding you today, and therefore you can say things you wouldn't say about other religions. I am always floored by that complaint. Show me any (non-Christian) museum or nature center or national park or educational institution or media source or retail outlet or ANYTHING out there that teaches my children anything except that the world spontaneously came into being out of nothing and has evolved on its own initiative... and all the other basic tenets that go against my worldview. I have found NO public place that espouses Christian beliefs, in Minnesota at least, except of course some homeschooling websites and maybe a couple Latino shopping districts. I hardly think that I am insulated nor that you are surrounded by an overbearing majority, but instead I see that as a myth that people are using to justify insulting Christians. But that wasn't my original point on my original post; it is just presented to clarify that the "Christian majority oppression" part of the discussion seems more justification of heated debate than an actual thing folks are suffering from.

© P.S.: I capitalized Bible as the title of a book.

 

7. To those defending other religions, there are a lot of contradictory or mistaken statements being thrown out ("ancient people had ancient religions" is not the same as "Christianity as mythology," for example, and it's not the case that two-thirds of the earth does not believe in the historical truth of Adam through Jesus). But most of all, I think folks are speaking without a lot of true familiarity with these other religions you feel need your defending. I personally work with and know folks in most of the major religions today. We have many conversations and we enjoy challenging one another's ideas and supporting one another's searches. Based on my knowledge and personal experience, I don't feel anything I said here or anywhere else on this board would offend any of them. For those of you who are just speaking in generalizations, I think a closer look might reveal that you are projecting thoughts onto them that just aren't there. I'll trying to list all the major groups you might be referring to, and whether they would be offended by my presenting Biblical history as fact, IMHO...

 

- Christians - 30+% of the world - would not be offended by reference to historical figures from Adam through Jesus as factual, although of course we've seen on this thread that there is some variation :)

- Muslims - 20% of the world - would definitely not be offended by reference to historical figures from Adam through Jesus as factual, and the differences of opinion would be based on dissenting facts rather than myth

- Hindus - almost 15% of the world - a prodigious group of beliefs, & folks I know seem happy to consider yet one more

- Buddhists - over 5% of the world - mostly philosophical and do not seem offended by other beliefs, let alone historical records

- Chinese ancient religions (Confucius, Tao, etc) - 5% or so of the world - again mostly philosophical and do not seem offended by beliefs or historical records

- Jews - less than 1% of the world - most of those I've known have leaned towards athiesm, or have been Christian Jews, but the Jewish faith would stand by the truth of historical figures from Adam through Jesus, with a few disagreements on details

- tribal religions - 5% of the world - as I understand what I've read and the few Native Americans I have known, most again have prodigious beliefs and might well be interested in historical figures from Adam through Jesus, though they could feel threatened if major changes seemed imminent or forced

- agnostic-types - 10% of the world - as I understand it, the number is high due to previous communism enforcement; voluntary agnostics I've known have often been open-minded about my religion, but some feel anger towards certain bad religious experiences and are maybe "selectively offended"?

- athiestic - 2% of the world - those I've known and those I've read about in history have been very offended by anything Christian but I haven't seen offense taken to other religious histories/beliefs, so it seems more of a prejudice than a true offense taken

 

 

 

Well, I'd better get some rest. I have to drive dh to get his transfusion tomorrow, so please don't make assumptions about my character if I don't respond any more. I've tried, anyways.

Julie

[Spy Car]

Instead, I still see the OP as looking for something that plucks out the particular pieces of the Bible that might be used for the express purpose of convincing your child that the Bible is "mythology."

 

Julie, the point is many of the Bible stories do fall in the realm of "mythology" (as the term is properly understood). They are stories of the creation of human-kind and the creation of the physical universe by a Creator-God and tell of man's relationship with that Creator. That makes them (by definition) "myths". The term "myth" does not imply these Bible stories or either true or false, just that they describe our origins in relation to a supernatural being.

 

 

I have to drive dh to get his transfusion tomorrow, so please don't make assumptions about my character if I don't respond any more. I've tried, anyways.

Julie

 

I hope that goes well Julie.

 

Bill

[KarenNC]

Just for the record, everyone who has said they wouldn't use the term "mythology" to refer to the beliefs that someone on the board holds *if they knew the person holding those beliefs was posting/reading* can now stop referring to belief in the Greek Gods as mythology, as you have a real, live, breathing person who does indeed worship the Olympians and believes that They are indeed actual entities, rather than just allegories, failed stories, pale imitations of the "real" God, etc.

 

Me :D;)

 

And I've been here (and repeatedly posting this when the topic comes up) since about 2005.

 

For the record, however, I refer to Greek mythology, as well as Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Jain, etc mythology because I agree with Bill;). Myth in this context is sacred story....period. It has other meanings in other contexts, but so do any number of words in the English language. In order to more clearly make my point, I do usually refer to all of them as the sacred stories of ___________.

 

As to why I haven't chimed in, well, I've actually been busy interacting in real life with the other members of my inclusive homeschool group (Christian, atheist, etc) all afternoon and evening and just saw the computer.:)

 

Now, whether it is ethically acceptable to refer to someone's beliefs in a way that one obviously considers offensive just because one thinks the person isn't actively listening is something one can take up with the ethical dictates of one's own religion. Mine frowns on it.

 

To answer the OP, we have the DK Children's Illustrated Bible and she's heard most of the major stories, as she has with the sacred stories of other religions. You will probably want to stick with a children's bible or book of stories rather than use the adult versions as, well, the adult version contains a lot of "adult" material. Some of the material regarding Abraham and his actions concerning his wife, for instance, in Genesis 12 and again in Genesis 20 are not something that I would want to necessarily discuss with my child until she is much older.

[nmoira]

 

(a) If you truly wanted knowledge of the Christian religion, surely there are thousands of Bibles available to you, all practically identical so reviews/previews would hardly be needed, but are available freely on Amazon. Instead, I still see the OP as looking for something that plucks out the particular pieces of the Bible that might be used for the express purpose of convincing your child that the Bible is "mythology." That still feels like something I would raise my hand and request moved to the general board.

I strongly disagree. This verges on the nonsensical, though it seems to be borne from a lack of comprehension: You seem not to be able to understand the need for someone to look for resources about a particular belief system which don't assume the reader shares the belief system. Do you teach world religions? Have you done so with young kids? Do you teach them from a point of view assuming they are believers? Would you suggest that a Christian wishing to teach their young children about Islam read them the Qur'an and leave it at that? What about someone just wanting to familiarize their children with Bible stories so they "get" the references in literature, like they would with Greek, Roman, Norse and other mythologies? I don't recall any requests for Greek mythology resources on the Curriculum board which were met with a call to move it to the General board. :confused: