Books about Christian mythology for non-Christians?

[KarenNC]

As for modern/living.... well... no, I wouldn't (ducking). Some people insist upon speaking Latin, but it's not a modern language. Some people still learn biblical Greek, and talk it, and write it, but it's not a modern language. By modern, or living, I mean something that is recognized and used by a large number of people. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judeism, Buddism, &tc. I know there are pagans, witches, &tc, but they are so far in the minority that I would say it's more of a throw back to a bygone era (like living history folks, or all those darlings that dress like it's the 30s). Of course, this is me talking, I would not call Jonah a myth either, so what does it matter?

 

Thanks for the condescending pat on the head of "oh isn't that cute, how she's playing pretend and dress-up" about my religion. It matters in that if you expect respect, you should be willing to also give it.

 

Christianity was also a minority for a good chunk of its history. At what point in history did Christianity gain enough followers to become a "real" religion rather than playacting/pretend or the Christian God to exist? With 5 million worshipers? 500,000? 500? 50? 5? What happens if the followers of the Christian God drop below that magic number? Do Jesus and your God cease to exist or become just an interesting story? The numbers argument is a dangerous one to trot out. It means that you are basing the validity and reality of a religion (and, hence, a deity/deities) on popularity, including your own.

 

Yes, I belong to a very tiny minority religion, but that does not mean that I do not believe that my Gods exist. They simply are. That fact is completely independent of whether you or I or your neighbor believe that, nor how many people on these boards repeatedly ridicule or revile Them. They do not exist or not exist based on votes from the viewing audience.

 

All the same, while gods bashing each other with hammers may seem funny, again, if they are taught thoroughly, there's nothing to laugh at. If people truly believed that Zeus might visit them as an animal, imagine the possible impact on young women. People worshipping animals changes the dynamic of man's place in the world (I'm speaking from our pov, so it would change our perception of man's place...).

 

Agreed and I appreciate that you see that. On the surface, an omniscient, omnipotent God who sends a bear to slaughter children because they called his prophet "Baldy" is pretty weird, as well. Myths (sacred stories) persist precisely because they deal with a deeper level than just a story. Those of all religions have much to say beyond just the surface reading.

[lionfamily1999]

Hi Julie! I'd like to jump in here, if that's okay. It was hard for *ME* to understand, because Melanie was clearly asking for a way to teach her children about the sacred stories of Christianity using resources that did not assume the reader was a Christian who believed those stories to be literally true. But she got treated as if she were asking for resources to prove to her children that Christianity is false, and in fact, was even accused of that very thing. The reaction was so disproportionate to the alleged offense, that I was stunned.

Just so's we're clear, I'm not the "Julie" that Melody (and others) were referring to earlier.

 

:shrug: It bugs me when I see it, but I don't try to make my offense a stumbling block to others. What surprises me is when people get offended, by someone else's offense, and then act like the first offended person is out of line for being offended, when really it's a personal thing and in this case a specific religion was named, and those of that religion were chastised for having been offended. Wow, that came out like who's on first......

Thanks for the condescending pat on the head of "oh isn't that cute, how she's playing pretend and dress-up" about my religion. It matters in that if you expect respect, you should be willing to also give it.

 

The dress up was referring to people that do dress up to bring historical activities or styles back to life. It wasn't meant for people that worship Greek/Roman gods or whatever. It was an example. Sorry I offended you.

Christianity was also a minority for a good chunk of its history. At what point in history did Christianity gain enough followers to become a "real" religion rather than playacting/pretend or the Christian God to exist? With 5 million worshipers? 500,000? 500? 50? 5? What happens if the followers of the Christian God drop below that magic number? Do Jesus and your God cease to exist or become just an interesting story? The numbers argument is a dangerous one to trot out. It means that you are basing the validity and reality of a religion (and, hence, a deity/deities) on popularity, including your own.

 

I said modern or living. I did not say real.

Yes, I belong to a very tiny minority religion, but that does not mean that I do not believe that my Gods exist. They simply are. That fact is completely independent of whether you or I or your neighbor believe that, nor how many people on these boards repeatedly ridicule or revile Them. They do not exist or not exist based on votes from the viewing audience.

 

 

 

Agreed and I appreciate that you see that. On the surface, an omniscient, omnipotent God who sends a bear to slaughter children because they called his prophet "Baldy" is pretty weird, as well. Myths (sacred stories) persist precisely because they deal with a deeper level than just a story. Those of all religions have much to say beyond just the surface reading.

Ok.

Edited February 5, 2010 by lionfamily1999

[Greta]

Just so's we're clear, I'm not the "Julie" that Melody (and others) were referring to earlier.

 

Oh, yes, I know! I remember you from some pleasant conversation several months ago. I don't even remember what we talked about now, I just remember I came away from it liking you. :001_smile:

[lionfamily1999]

Oh, yes, I know! I remember you from some pleasant conversation several months ago. I don't even remember what we talked about now, I just remember I came away from it liking you. :001_smile:

Same conversation, different thread, or close enough ;)

[Lovedtodeath]

That said... Whether or not I believe the Bible to be true should be irrelevant. In fact, it's rather silly that the offense is about me using mythology, which apparently is taken to mean fiction, when I don't think those same offended people would care a lick if I wrote a post that said "I am a non-Christian and do not teach the Bible as fact. Can you recommend some books for me?" So the very fact that I used a word that *does not* pass judgement on whether or not the religious teachings are true or false is what's biting me in the bum. Funny, really.

This is an excellent explanation. I had not looked at it in that way.

[MelanieM]

What surprises me is when people get offended, by someone else's offense, and then act like the first offended person is out of line for being offended, when really it's a personal thing and in this case a specific religion was named, and those of that religion were chastised for having been offended. Wow, that came out like who's on first......

 

I don't think anyone is offended because people are offended. What people are expressing distaste over is not the fact that others are offended, but rather that those offended parties seem to be asking for something that makes no sense (to some) as a way for them to feel better. So go ahead and be offended. But don't tell everyone else that they need to change their worldview so that you can rid yourself of those feelings.

 

As for me, I'm not personally offended at all, even though I do feel there have been unreasonable assumptions made about me and my intentions. I am a little surprised at what seems to be passing as acceptable in the minds of some. (I say "seems to be" and "in the minds of" because no one seems to want to confirm or deny what appears to be happening here.)

[Jenn in Mo]

My stamina might have failed, but the conversion of Jenn has filled my spirit with hopefulness that we can re-claim the right, respectable, and correct meaning of the term Myth from those who would corrupt this fine and noble term.

 

On this hill, I will make my stand :D

 

Bill

 

I shared this conversation with my husband and when I told him about "sacred stories", he said "Um, yeah?" Exact same scenario with a close friend. They thought it was odd to assume it meant anything else.

 

I completely see the definition others are describing. The show Mythbusters is not "Sacred Story busters" for a reason. It is a common interpretation. This doesn't make the other definition less common. It's like the word "fire". How many meanings can be attributed to the word "fire"? One definition in particular might jump into your mind first, but it would be ridiculous to insist it's the only definition and that everyone should only use the word "fire" in the context you prefer seeing it.

[Lovedtodeath]

I am a little surprised at what seems to be passing as acceptable in the minds of some. (I say "seems to be" and "in the minds of" because no one seems to want to confirm or deny what appears to be happening here.)

In my mind, it is not acceptable for Christian history from the Inspired Word of God to be lumped in with myths that pertain to falsehoods.

 

There you go... have I confirmed what is happening here?

 

Disclaimer: I personally believe that many of the gods in other religious myths did/do exist. I understand that I am not going to get someone who is not a Christian to treat Christian history as any different than myths of other religions, and I choose to let that go. I personally do not like the term "Christian Mythology". It makes me angry. Am I personally offended? That is harder to answer... I am somewhere in the middle I suppose. I can totally understand why some people are turned away from Christianity and thus the rest of the Scriptures altogether... and the Scriptures did say that we shouldn't be surprised at people not believing and even ridiculing.

 

I choose to use and write secular materials because I don't want religion mixed in with my school materials. Not everyone believes the same thing. (and not being a main stream Protestant myself, I can see that fully-planned curriculum that is not from a Protestant Young Earth perspective is needed.)

Edited February 5, 2010 by Lovedtodeath

[lionfamily1999]

In my mind, it is not acceptable for Christian history from the Inspired Word of God to be lumped in with myths that pertain to falsehoods.

 

There you go... have I confirmed what is happening here?

 

Disclaimer: I personally believe that many of the gods in other religious myths did/do exist. I understand that I am not going to get someone who is not a Christian to treat Christian history as any different than myths of other religions, and I choose to let that go. I personally do not like the term "Christian Mythology". It makes me angry. Am I personally offended? That is harder to answer... I am somewhere in the middle I suppose. I can totally understand why some people are turned away from Christianity and thus the rest of the Scriptures altogether... and the Scriptures did say that we shouldn't be surprised at people not believing and even ridiculing.

I agree, top to bottom. Like I wrote before, I would not want my offense to be someone else's stumbling block.

[Greta]

Same conversation, different thread, or close enough ;)

 

Oh, wow, was it really?!? That's too funny! I'll have to look it up, because I am still not remembering. My memory is so bad it scares me sometimes.

 

Also, just wanted to say that I definitely do understand the point that (I think) you're trying to make -- that when we say something, and people reply that they're offended, we should stop and think about that and ask ourselves how we could have said it better. All of us owe it to each other, and honestly to ourselves, to take that moment to consider.

 

That said, however, when people get offended at things we never actually said, that is their responsibility and they need to own up to it.

 

Perhaps the problem is that both things were going on at once in this thread. And the former got drowned out by the latter.

 

ETA: What I mean is, I think Melanie really was making an effort to understand how she had offended, but it really just came down to some people preferring that she chose a different word for the same meaning that she was trying to convey. That should not have been such a big deal, should it?

Edited February 5, 2010 by GretaLynne

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Perhaps the problem is that both things were going on at once in this thread.

:iagree:

[MelanieM]

In my mind, it is not acceptable for Christian history from the Inspired Word of God to be lumped in with myths that pertain to falsehoods.

 

I completely get this as your personal belief, and thank you for coming out and agreeing that the real issue is a matter of whether or not Christianity should be counted in the same realm as other religions.

 

If I can ask, would you take it a step further to say that it is then unacceptable for someone that does not believe what you believe to lump them all together? I mean, do you expect people who do not believe what you believe to speak and act as if they agree with you, just because it might make you feel better, or lend more authority to your beliefs? What happens when your Word of God is considered a falsehood and Jane's is considered Truth? Does Jane still have to speak as if yours is (possibly? absolutely?) true, and disregard the fact that you speak freely as if hers isn't?

 

Now, let me say again that in my OP I never used the word mythology to mean falsehood. I'm simply getting into it hear because it's the direction the thread has taken. I still maintain that mythology is an entirely neutral word.

[christine in al]

Originally Posted by Spy Car

I won't argue that the term myth hasn't been vulgarized by reality-show producers (and others) it has. But the fact remains there is a long tradition of scholastic use that continues to this day, and that usage is the correct use.

 

I'd assume as community of people interested in Classical Education we would use terms like Myth and Mythology in their proper classical meaning and context, and not let our standards be lowered to those of the barbarians.

 

You gotta have hope :D

 

Bill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"waiting is"

Michael Valentine Smith

[lionfamily1999]

Oh, wow, was it really?!? That's too funny! I'll have to look it up, because I am still not remembering. My memory is so bad it scares me sometimes.

 

Also, just wanted to say that I definitely do understand the point that (I think) you're trying to make -- that when we say something, and people reply that they're offended, we should stop and think about that and ask ourselves how we could have said it better. All of us owe it to each other, and honestly to ourselves, to take that moment to consider.

 

That said, however, when people get offended at things we never actually said, that is their responsibility and they need to own up to it.

 

Perhaps the problem is that both things were going on at once in this thread. And the former got drowned out by the latter.

I agree. We've been studying Corinthians and reached the part about eating food meant for idols. It's very interesting to hear so many different takes on what is offensive, what offensive really means, how we should handle offensive behaviors &tc. I think the key is, as you wrote, to concentrate more on personal behavior.

 

IOW, even if someone is offended by something that was not meant to be offensive, or even added in stuff that wasn't really there, we should be careful not become offensive in our response......... or something like that. It's snowing, I want spring, and that is taking over more and more of my brain right now ;)

[Lovedtodeath]

 

If I can ask, would you take it a step further to say that it is then unacceptable for someone that does not believe what you believe to lump them all together? I mean, do you expect people who do not believe what you believe to speak and act as if they agree with you, just because it might make you feel better, or lend more authority to your beliefs? What happens when your Word of God is considered a falsehood and Jane's is considered Truth? Does Jane still have to speak as if yours is (possibly? absolutely?) true, and disregard the fact that you speak freely as if hers isn't?

I already attempted to answer that. The only thing I can think to add is that reality does not change. Edited February 5, 2010 by Lovedtodeath
shortened

[lionfamily1999]

I completely get this as your personal belief, and thank you for coming out and agreeing that the real issue is a matter of whether or not Christianity should be counted in the same realm as other religions.

 

If I can ask, would you take it a step further to say that it is then unacceptable for someone that does not believe what you believe to lump them all together? I mean, do you expect people who do not believe what you believe to speak and act as if they agree with you, just because it might make you feel better, or lend more authority to your beliefs? What happens when your Word of God is considered a falsehood and Jane's is considered Truth? Does Jane still have to speak as if yours is (possibly? absolutely?) true, and disregard the fact that you speak freely as if hers isn't?

 

Now, let me say again that in my OP I never used the word mythology to mean falsehood. I'm simply getting into it hear because it's the direction the thread has taken. I still maintain that mythology is an entirely neutral word.

Unacceptable is a difficult word. Do I accept or allow others to demean my religion to me...... sometimes, when I get tired of fielding the same arguements a hundred times. I know they're wrong, but what can I do about it? Do I think there should be legal action taken, nope, beauty of this country and all that. Do I think I have to sit back and take it, nope, again thank you USA.

 

No, Jane doesn't, but Jane shouldn't be too surprised when people get upset. Christians get the same grief when they say theirs is the only true religion (well, what about the rest of the religions!?!), but then, the Christians I've known are all very aware that people will disagree with and probably take offense to them saying that.

[Greta]

IOW, even if someone is offended by something that was not meant to be offensive, or even added in stuff that wasn't really there, we should be careful not become offensive in our response......... or something like that. It's snowing, I want spring, and that is taking over more and more of my brain right now ;)

 

Point taken, and I hope I did not cross that line. I was hesitant to get involved, because I feared that very thing. But also felt compelled to defend Melanie's original question and intention. So it was just . . . sticky. I should be used to that, hanging around on these boards! :lol:

 

ETA: And I am genuinely exploring the question of how/when a Christian should "stand up" for Christianity. When is debate appropriate? I don't know.

Edited February 5, 2010 by GretaLynne

[lionfamily1999]

Point taken, and I hope I did not cross that line. I was hesitant to get involved, because I feared that very thing. But also felt compelled to defend Melanie's original question and intention. So it was just . . . sticky. I should be used to that, hanging around on these boards! :lol:

Lol, I'm getting there (being used to this). I didn't find you offensive at all, but I'm sure someone did.

[Mom-ninja.]

I was looking for similar resources a while back. I think originally the book was $75 so I reluctantly gave up. I would like to hold it in my hands before purchasing. This thread discussed it briefly. Happygrrl, I think this project has an affiliation with Concordia College. Isn't it time for you to make a field trip starting at Powell's?

 

Yes, I want to know more about this book too.

 

 

My stamina might have failed, but the conversion of Jenn has filled my spirit with hopefulness that we can re-claim the right, respectable, and correct meaning of the term Myth from those who would corrupt this fine and noble term.

 

On this hill, I will make my stand :D

 

Bill

 

Keep on the crusade! (yes, pun intended :tongue_smilie:)

 

 

Wine methinks.

 

How about a shot of tequila at every mention of "Myth" or "Mythology"

 

 

 

In my mind, it is not acceptable for Christian history from the Inspired Word of God to be lumped in with myths that pertain to falsehoods.

 

There you go... have I confirmed what is happening here?

 

 

You have made the statement that people have alluded to but not come right out and said, yes.

 

Oh, and I can't count how many times I read here, "falsehoods" when refering to other religions other than Christianity. Yet, I don't let my head start spinning.

 

So, in your mind you can keep Christianity separate from what you consider falsehoods. That is your right and your belief. Yet, you can not expect others to uphold what you consider acceptable or unacceptable when it comes to your personal beliefs vs others beliefs.

[Lovedtodeath]

Okay... I am trying to find a way to explain this:

 

An intelligent, loving, and sincere person can believe something other than the Truth (as found in the Holy Scriptures and as is the reality today). I am no better than he/she. I can understand where he/she is coming from. If they call THE Truth something other than THE Truth then it makes me angry, but not angry at that person.

 

Because people think that Christianity should be afforded more respect than other religious beliefs, but nobody actually wants to come right out and say it.

 

Okay... I will say it. The history written in the Bible should be afforded more respect than any other religious beliefs. Why? Because it is the truth pertaining to mankind, our existence, our history, our reason for being, our reason for suffering. It is based on what the Almighty, the Creator, He Who Causes to Become, Jehovah, Yahweh has chosen to share with his creation. The others simply are not.

 

Should we demand respect? If we are imitators of our God will we demand respect? Did Jesus demand respect? That is something for all of us to think about.

 

But I am compelled to point out that respecting a belief is different than respecting a person. Yes, it definitely is in my mind and the way that I think.

Edited February 5, 2010 by Lovedtodeath

[Lovedtodeath]

So, in your mind you can keep Christianity separate from what you consider falsehoods. That is your right and your belief. Yet, you can not expect others to uphold what you consider acceptable or unacceptable when it comes to your personal beliefs vs others beliefs.

(italics mine) Hey, you are preaching to the choir here.;)

[Spy Car]

Isn't there some cute quote about cats losing their tails every time "Myth" is used to mean "false" that you can put in your signature?

 

 

What, you think I haven't considered:

 

Every time you use Myth as a synonym for false-hood, cat's die.

 

But that would be wrong :D

 

Bill (apologies to Mrs Mungo)

[Lovedtodeath]

What if I don't like cats? Can we say that a fairy loses its wings?

[smrtmama]

By modern, or living, I mean something that is recognized and used by a large number of people. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judeism, Buddism, &tc. I know there are pagans, witches, &tc, but they are so far in the minority that I would say it's more of a throw back to a bygone era (like living history folks, or all those darlings that dress like it's the 30s).

 

That is possible the most dismissive, insensitive, and insulting thing that has been said in this entire thread. You have essentially just said:

 

"Respect my religion 100%, in the way I demand it, while I refer to your religion as non-living, non-modern, an insignificant minority, and compare your religious practices and beliefs to people participating in anachronistic hobby organizations."

 

So it's respect only for a group that is big enough?

[Corraleno]

Every time you use Myth as a synonym for false-hood, cat's die.

 

 

:smilielol5: :smilielol5: :smilielol5:

 

Jackie

[swimmermom3]

What, you think I haven't considered:

 

Every time you use Myth as a synonym for false-hood, cat's die.

 

But that would be wrong :D

 

Bill (apologies to Mrs Mungo)

 

I looked at that and thought, "How did Bill, of all people, put an...nooooooo!" Gasp...sputter...snort. Really, you shouldn't have. But it totally made my day.:D

[smrtmama]

I looked at that and thought, "How did Bill, of all people, put an...nooooooo!" Gasp...sputter...snort. Really, you shouldn't have. But it totally made my day.:D

 

I thought the superfluous apostrophe was exactly the thing that made that quote perfect. ;)

[Spy Car]

At any rate, as far as I can tell, the worst thing we can accuse the OP of is saying that she doesn't believe the Bible is literally true.

 

Right. But that itself is a problem. If we remove the neutral usage of a term like Myth or Mythology, and substitute a meaning that carries an inherent message that other peoples deeply-held and valued sacred tales are false-hoods, then we lose a means of communicating across faith positions without causing just the sort of hurt feelings a neutral term seeks to avoid.

 

Not well expressed, but I need more coffee.

 

Now I just want to put Spy Car and kokotg in a room and watch them argue. With coffee. Lots of coffee.

 

LOTS OF COFFEE :D

 

Bill

[stripe]

Okay... I will say it. The history written in the Bible should be afforded more respect than any other religious beliefs. Why? Because it is the truth pertaining to mankind, our existence, our history, our reason for being, our reason for suffering. It is based on what the Almighty, the Creator, He Who Causes to Become, Jehovah, Yahweh has chosen to share with his creation. The others simply are not.

This is a matter of perspective, though, isn't it? I daresay that this opinion is mostly held by Christians. I think most religious adherents believe their religion is true. So I don't imagine most non-Christians would agree with you.

[lionfamily1999]

What if I don't like cats? Can we say that a fairy loses its wings?

That's a whole nother can o' worms ;) Lol, some days I've looked at my fat lazy cats and thought... worm's worm's worm's :lol:

 

*********************

I don't believe it's possible to respect everyone's personal boundaries or to say anything that would not offend someone. Using the majority, or those with the loudest voices anyway (since they always seem like the majority), imo, makes sense. Just like the words mentioned before, they're not used because the majority find them offensive. Some people, though, are going to be offended any time anyone of a certain type opens their mouth (or hits submit). In that case, there's not too much you can do. :shrug: Like I posted before, you can try to rectify it (take note for future reference, apologize and move on) or you can just say scrooge it and trample on ahead.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

What, you think I haven't considered:

 

Every time you use Myth as a synonym for false-hood, cat's die.

 

But that would be wrong :D

 

Bill (apologies to Mrs Mungo)

 

:lol:

[Lovedtodeath]

This is a matter of perspective, though, isn't it?

Actually my exact point is that it is not a matter of perspective.;)

 

So I don't imagine most non-Christians would agree with you.

Well, I know that. :001_huh: I have also tempered my posts with explanations that I respect people who do not hold to my beliefs, and I do not believe that I am any better than them, but I don't see you quoting those parts of my posts.

[MelanieM]

stripe, I think the point she's making is that it isn't a matter of perspective, it just *is*. So for that reason, Christianity should be afforded more respect. Of course, it's a completely circular argument that doesn't translate to different world views. But in the world view of those that believe it, it makes sense.

 

I personally find that belief to be obnoxious. It doesn't translate to my world view at all, and it takes a little bit of a mind warp to even grasp it. But I'm ok with people believing whatever they want to believe. I'm even ok with them believing I should believe it too. Not that what someone wants is going to be equal to what they get... but they can certainly go ahead and keep on wanting it!

 

Carmen and Julie, thanks for stepping up and answering the question put to you. I appreciate your clarity of response.

[Spy Car]

Could you then explain why a myriad of dictionaries include the following definitions (which I've copied word for word) of "myth"? (The dictionaries do also include your definition, but only as one of several definitions.)

 

Sure, I'm happy to explain why (those who've heard it before can skip to the next post).

 

false belief: a widely held but mistaken belief

 

fictitious person or thing: somebody who or something that is fictitious or nonexistent, but whose existence is widely believed in

 

an unfounded or false notion

 

a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence

 

any fictitious story, or unscientific account, theory, belief, etc.

 

any imaginary person or thing spoken of as though existing

 

A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology

 

a fictitious story, person, or thing

 

Most dictionaries are "descriptive." They (as term term suggests) describe how terms are used in the "common parlance." And they don't prescribe "correct usage" (although some dictionaries have prescriptive elements, things such as pointing out non-standard usage or slang, for example).

 

If one accepts the definition of a word is correct because many people commonly use it in an incorrect fashion, then the definitions in a descriptive dictionary might suffice to convince one on usage issues. I don't share this notion.

 

There are correct usages of terms, and incorrect usages of terms. I don't go for "cultural relativism" or the notion that because a lot of people use a word wrongly that that "wrong-ness" should be embraced. KWIM?

 

I guess I don't understand how, as a classical educator, I'm only to follow your given definition and ignore all of the other ones found in each dictionary I checked.

 

I don't ignore the other definitions, but I do reject them as utterly incorrect usage, and I do so based on my education.

 

I'm wondering what it is about your definition that makes it superior and the only one classical, educated, intelligent people would use? I'm not here for an argument; I'm only looking for clarification.

 

Because this is the settled definition that educated persons have long ascribed Myth in the English language. It's not "my definition", it is a part of our shared cultural legacy.

 

Bill

Edited February 5, 2010 by Spy Car

[stripe]

Actually my exact point is that it is not a matter of perspective.;)

 

Believers of other faiths believe just as strongly that theirs is true, and they see that as an eternal truth that needs no perspective or agreement from non-believers.

[nmoira]

How about a shot of tequila at every mention of "Myth" or "Mythology"

Why do you think my posts have devolved to single sentences and *swoon* ?

 

:cheers2:

[lionfamily1999]

stripe, I think the point she's making is that it isn't a matter of perspective, it just *is*. So for that reason, Christianity should be afforded more respect. Of course, it's a completely circular argument that doesn't translate to different world views. But in the world view of those that believe it, it makes sense.

 

I personally find that belief to be obnoxious. It doesn't translate to my world view at all, and it takes a little bit of a mind warp to even grasp it. But I'm ok with people believing whatever they want to believe. I'm even ok with them believing I should believe it too. Not that what someone wants is going to be equal to what they get... but they can certainly go ahead and keep on wanting it!

 

Carmen and Julie, thanks for stepping up and answering the question put to you. I appreciate your clarity of response.

Everyone's got their hamster wheels ;) You think you're right too :p That is, I believe, what Carmen was trying to say.

[Mom-ninja.]

stripe, I think the point she's making is that it isn't a matter of perspective, it just *is*. So for that reason, Christianity should be afforded more respect. Of course, it's a completely circular argument that doesn't translate to different world views. But in the world view of those that believe it, it makes sense.

 

I personally find that belief to be obnoxious. It doesn't translate to my world view at all, and it takes a little bit of a mind warp to even grasp it. But I'm ok with people believing whatever they want to believe. I'm even ok with them believing I should believe it too. Not that what someone wants is going to be equal to what they get... but they can certainly go ahead and keep on wanting it!

 

 

 

I've never been able to wrap my mind around it either. To me it's egocentric, not to believe that way, but to demand and expect others to treat your belief in a superior way.

[MelanieM]

Everyone's got their hamster wheels ;) You think you're right too :p That is, I believe, what Carmen was trying to say.

 

Absolutely. Though I must tell you, that what I believe amounts to this: whatever you believe, is true. So in my worldview, we're all right! (My world view is all about perspective, and it even allows for Carmen's belief that there's no such thing as perspective. ;))

[smrtmama]

I've never been able to wrap my mind around it either. To me it's egocentric, not to believe that way, but to demand and expect others to treat your belief in a superior way.

 

:iagree:

 

Egocentric. That's the root of it. My way is right, yours is wrong, and you must acknowledge the inherent superiority of my way.

[nmoira]

 

I've never been able to wrap my mind around it either. To me it's egocentric, not to believe that way, but to demand and expect others to treat your belief in a superior way.

In a nutshell. :D

[Rosie_0801]

I know Christians that are cruel about other religions. I know Christians that are mean. All the Christians I know are sinners (ba dump bump). I also know Athiests that are cruel, condenscending, rude and teach that to their children. No religious group has more bad characters than another, ime. Humanity is the only group with a premium on cruelty (iow, every division in humanity gets its fair share of jerks).

 

Not disagreeing here, but I would like to point out that neo-pagans should not always be put into the same category as atheists. I know you haven't said so in this paragraph, but I get the feeling around here that not everyone understands that.

 

I know there are pagans, witches, &tc, but they are so far in the minority that I would say it's more of a throw back to a bygone era (like living history folks, or all those darlings that dress like it's the 30s).

 

Not necessarily :) Not all neo-pagans are re-enacting or reviving or feel they are continuing ancient practices. Plenty of neo-pagans do what they do without any reference at all to any old Norse, ancient Greek, Roman, Celtic traditions. Just so you know ;) And if they do, they feel just as strongly about it as anyone else does about their spiritual practices.

 

Could you then explain why a myriad of dictionaries include the following definitions (which I've copied word for word) of "myth"? (The dictionaries do also include your definition, but only as one of several definitions.)

I guess I don't understand how, as a classical educator, I'm only to follow your given definition and ignore all of the other ones found in each dictionary I checked. I'm wondering what it is about your definition that makes it superior and the only one classical, educated, intelligent people would use? I'm not here for an argument; I'm only looking for clarification.

 

I think the point is that we needn't *assume* someone is using the negative definitions. We could give them the benefit of the doubt, or if we can't do that, we can assume they are rude people and ignore them. Why assume someone is out to get you when on a message board where things clearly aren't personal. If someone eggs your house, calls you by name or sends you an abusive pm, then it is personal. There are contextual clues to be used to figure out whether a person is being deliberately offensive, has merely worded something poorly, or has a different world view. It is a good idea to consider these things before delivering angry messages.

 

:shrug: It bugs me when I see it, but I don't try to make my offense a stumbling block to others. What surprises me is when people get offended, by someone else's offense, and then act like the first offended person is out of line for being offended

 

Don't think anyone is arguing that people have no right to be offended. I think they are arguing against people such as Person B slamming Person A for slamming them. Person B could have said "Please be careful using that phrase, many people will find it offensive. You might have better luck if you phrase your questions <this way.>" It seems to be the "pot calling the kettle black" thing that's bothering people most.

 

[quote name=MelanieM;1477071

If I can ask' date=' would you take it a step further to say that it is then unacceptable for someone that does not believe what you believe to lump them all together? I mean, do you expect people who do not believe what you believe to speak and act as if they agree with you, just because it might make you feel better, or lend more authority to your beliefs? What happens when your Word of God is considered a falsehood and Jane's is considered Truth? Does Jane still have to speak as if yours is (possibly? absolutely?) true, and disregard the fact that you speak freely as if hers isn't?[/quote]

 

You weren't talking to me, but I think this is a phenomenon we bump into often in life. "Yes, I think you should do as I say. No, I don't expect you will."

 

Point taken, and I hope I did not cross that line.

 

Hehehe. I wouldn't worry about that. If you'd like to know, the most annoying thing I find in your posts on religious topics is your disclaimer that as a new Christian you haven't as much weight as others, and you keep saying that even though other Christians say that isn't so.

 

You can relax, ok ;) There is no magic number of times to read the Bible before you count. You count already, even with your imperfect knowledge, even when you know there are other more knowlegable Bible scholars on here.

 

ETA: And I am genuinely exploring the question of how/when a Christian should "stand up" for Christianity. When is debate appropriate? I don't know.

 

When is debate appropriate? Only when you are agreeing with the other person, or if you are in politics (but that hardly counts because they can't debate properly,) I think...

 

My real answer: I think you should stand up for Christianity when you are certain someone is making unreasonable, immature or unsubstantiated criticisms and you think some explanation will help. (If you don't think it will help, it's hitting your head against a brick wall.) I think there are times where verbally hitting them over the head with a brick is going to be justified, but it's best not to do that if something milder would do. If your child drops a glass you say "Oops, we need to clean that up. Please be more careful next time." If you *know* they've thrown the glass deliberately, whatever we say is going to be in CAPS ;)

 

 

Rosie

[Storm Bay]

 

Karin, do you think other threads that use the word mythology should be removed? Why is it ok for other religions, but not for Christianity? That's the only question I have, really. Perhaps you can help me better understand the issue here.

 

 

My post implied that the term myth should not be used in conjunction with any major religion that is adhered to by many, including the 4 others I named, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism & Buddhism. Not because I agree with all religions, but out of respect for others' beliefs. Generally I use the term mythology for things not widely believed anymore or for easily disproved concrete things that come up in the media. However, I've never come to this forum asking for a book on mythology.

[Greta]

Hehehe. I wouldn't worry about that. If you'd like to know, the most annoying thing I find in your posts on religious topics is your disclaimer that as a new Christian you haven't as much weight as others, and you keep saying that even though other Christians say that isn't so.

 

You can relax, ok ;) There is no magic number of times to read the Bible before you count. You count already, even with your imperfect knowledge, even when you know there are other more knowlegable Bible scholars on here.

 

:D Thanks, Rosie. I'm just afraid of being the know-it-all newbie I guess. I've done that in other areas before, and don't want to do it in something as important as this. But I will try to take your advice and relax.

 

 

 

I think you should stand up for Christianity when you are certain someone is making unreasonable, immature or unsubstantiated criticisms and you think some explanation will help. (If you don't think it will help, it's hitting your head against a brick wall.)

Makes perfect sense.

[HRAAB]

I remember back in 1976 sitting in Fr. Fraser's World Religions class and him teaching what myth is. Myth is most profound, deep truth. Myths form people, their conscience. Myths form cultures. I have never believed the OT to historical fact but to be a collection of very sacred stories that teach a profound truth. That is what my children have been taught. I don't know what other word to use to describe them. I can't call them fables. I think legend would be offensive, too. Folktales? Yet they're not just a 'fiction story'. They are much more important than that. 'Bible stories' even seems to lessen their importance. That's why I choose the word myth based on what I was taught.

 

There's really no point to this post; just venting some of my personal frustration. I keep looking for some way to bridge the gap between Christianity and myself. Reach across the aisle and join hands? I learn much from these discussions (believe it or not, until I came to this board I'd never considered the word mythology to be offensive). That's good; learning more opens the door to discussion. Then sometimes it just feels like discussion is more or less impossible.

[EmilyK]

I just wanted to point out that I know many Christians, and also some folks of other religions (numbers only limited by who I know, not that they're aren't out there), who do not believe that their religion is the only truth, or the only way to live. These folks (including me) usually find their own scriptures to be inspired sacred texts, and respect other religious texts, but do not find them to be transcripts of actual events in the way a court reporter would take down a deposition. Scholars such as Marcus Borg, Dominic Crossan, and John Shelby Spong explain it better than I can.

[Jenn in Mo]

 

ETA: And I am genuinely exploring the question of how/when a Christian should "stand up" for Christianity. When is debate appropriate? I don't know.

 

I think it is appropriate to correct a misunderstanding someone might have about the Christian faith. If someone makes an erroneous statement about my beliefs, I think it is completely natural to enlighten them as to what my beliefs really are. If someone says "I think Christianity is stupid".....well, okay. They think it's stupid. This doesn't affect me. This doesn't affect anyone. This is something they think. Let 'em. In fact, efforts to convince them otherwise will most likely just solidify their opinion. If someone says "Christianity? Oh, yeah, you're the group that sacrifices goats!" This would be erroneous. lol. But more realistically, I've had people say they heard you can't drink if you're a Christian or you'll go to hell, you can't go to any denomination church except 'this one' or you'll go to hell, that God let someone close to them die because He wanted to punish them. These all deserve clarification. That's not an argument, it's a discussion.

 

GretaLynne, I think you and I are very much in agreement here. Your post just opened up an opportunity for me to share what was on my heart.

 

I think Christ is "the Way and the Truth and the Life." I know it is so. And so I should. How ridiculous would it be for me to cling to a faith that I didn't fully believe in? However, me believing this wholeheartedly does not mean everyone else believes it. The fact is, I am surrounded by people who believe in something different. And we have to accept that they really believe in their religion just as we really believe in ours. Discounting their beliefs, telling them their beliefs aren't as special as ours is insulting and benefits no one. We all believe our way is the right way. That's what faith is.

 

I most definitely desire for others to share my faith because it is the "right" one. (don't bristle, I'm going somewhere with this) But how would I feel if someone of a different faith told me mine was silly? Would I be more likely to embrace their beliefs and discount my own or would I angrily cling to mine ever stronger? How would I feel if someone told me that they found it offensive when I talked about my faith? Would I covet their religion? Would I shrug and say "get over it"? Am I speaking to them in a way that leaves room for them to see the love of God in me?

 

What I'm saying is that believing without compromise is not the same as demanding without compromise that everyone acknowledge my faith as superior.

 

I believe the Christian faith is superior. And the Muslim to my left believes his faith is superior. And the Pagan to my right believes her faith is superior. We all have the freedom to choose what we'll believe. Are my words and actions such that those around me might be attracted to my faith or disgusted by my faith? Some days it might depend on how much coffee I've had to drink. :tongue_smilie: I'm sure I've done my part in giving Christianity a bad name. Never intentionally, of course, but we all have our moments. I have soooooo not "arrived". It is my responsibility, as long as I'm still human, to examine my words and actions and to walk circumspectly. And to keep trying.

[Rosie_0801]

:D Thanks, Rosie. I'm just afraid of being the know-it-all newbie I guess. I've done that in other areas before, and don't want to do it in something as important as this. But I will try to take your advice and relax.

 

 

No need to fear misleading anyone. There are plenty of helpful people here who'll correct you if they think it necessary for yours and anyone else's education. We have well trained minds around here. Or are at least trying to train them well ;)

 

Being a "know it all newbie" online is different to being one irl. In the latter case, it's more comfortable if you avoid it. Online, well you don't know these people anyway so you might as well jump in and get your boots muddy. It's good practice :)

 

Rosie

[Haiku]

 

Egocentric. That's the root of it. My way is right, yours is wrong, and you must acknowledge the inherent superiority of my way.

 

I am a member of what is, in this country, a minority religion. I believe that my religion's wordview is correct and everyone else, whether they believe in it or not, is living in that reality.

 

However, I would never, ever expect people who don't share my religion to tiptoe around acting like my religion is true. The very idea is ludicrous. People feel quite free to tell me to my face that what I believe is wrong. I certainly don't do that to people, but I absolutely would never expect someone to behave as though they think my religion is true if they don't believe it.

 

Someone else not believing my religion is true does not threaten me.

 

I wonder if that's a perspective that those in the minority can accept more easily than those in the majority. For someone in the minority, the idea that others would behave as though the minority religion is true is just silly, because we know that it would never happen so expecting it to is not even something we consider.

 

As an aside, I have often told my husband that I wish we lived in a place where our religion was dominant. This thread has changed my mind. I don't want to be told what to think, and I don't want to live in a place where I am expected to hold to the party line. I discuss my spiritual ideas with my spiritual teacher and from there I make my decisions about what to believe. I would not want to live in a place where someone else officially proscribes what my beliefs should be to be considered valid.

 

Tara

[Guest Cindie2dds]

My post implied that the term myth should not be used in conjunction with any major religion that is adhered to by many, including the 4 others I named, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism & Buddhism. Not because I agree with all religions, but out of respect for others' beliefs.

 

What about respect for wiccans, pagans or atheists, etc.? Why don't these and others get the respect? To me everything other than Christianity is a myth; not so for others, hence the respect from both sides is warranted on an inclusive board. :)