George,

It’s pretty unfair to compare atheists who have naive understandings of scripture with theists who have naive understandings of science and/or scripture because, unlike science, there is no definitive, reliable or objective method of determining what a naive or a sophisticated understanding of scripture is.

<<There are those - theists or atheists - who have a rather sophisticated understanding of one of them, but a rather naive understanding of the other one.>>

Until you can objectively demonstrate what a naive understanding of scripture is and how it differs from a “sophisticated” understanding, this claim is meaningless.

I would suspect the closest you could come to demonstrating the difference would be to describe what could also be understood (and arguably more rationally) as an obfuscation and cherry picking of scripture in light of what we now know due to factors completely external to scripture itself. Meaning that the scripture was near - if not totally - useless in providing any understanding of it meant in the first place.

Hardly the stuff of a divine being.

<<In both directions.>>

They are not two equally opposing views and to equate the two in such a way here (as you do in so many other aspects on so many other occasions) is misleading.

I won’t hold my breath for any acknowledgement of this any time soon though, since this is clearly just a mechanism you employ to assuage both the discomfort of the position your intellect has lead you to and the sheer absurdity of religious belief in general.

"He could not be, in Luther’s terms “the crucified God” and his death could not give satisfaction for the sins of the whole world."
Satisfaction to whom, precisely? Himself? I'm sorry, but that sounds like so weird form of moral masturbation to me.
In an age -and a country- where even painless capital punishment is unacceptable, and torture is definitely considered barbaric, it's difficult to understand how anyone could revere a God who would use such methods just to make a point.
To Himself.(Herself, Itself, whatever).

King Hazza: Actually you are the one who finally has got it. Peter had it all along. If you'd actually read his previous articles on similar themes you would know that he has consistently asserted that God is not a supernatural being, that he does not intervene in the material world, etc. You have finally understood him. Well done!

Jon J: You seem to suggest that Sells' reference to "the imaginary world in which believers live" shows that believers are deluded. You're scared of imagination, aren't you? It can lead to reality that emanates from the deep unconscious, and you don't want to face it. The empirical perception that science needs to study the objective world cannot lead to awareness of the Divine. For that awareness to develop we first need to drop some defences and allow the inner world to yield images for our careful conscious contemplation.

Perhaps you should seek advice from "The Greens" or the "Climate Change Theorists" for they "Excel" at what you desire to do .

Rhian,
Sorry, try this:

http://petersellick.nationalforum.com.au/articles.php

VK3AUU
Good point. Socinius in the early 17th C made the same point about the two natures of Christ, to say that he was both human and divine is like saying that something is both fire and water. I have been accused of referring to the imaginary world of believers, meaning perhaps that this is not a real world. But as one writer replied, we all live in imaginary world that we construct. There is no alternative. The Question is really about the truth of the world we construct. Does it allow us to penetrate to the really real? Or is it fantasy world. i.e. does our imaginary world enable us to interact with the real world in an accurate fashion? I would contend that the imaginary world of Christians allows us to penetrate to what is real but unseen, the reality below our surface perceptions. The things seen and unseen as the creed will have it.

Dealing with paradox is essential to seeing the unseen. Although the Word becoming flesh is a paradox it points to something else that is very real in the lives of believers, real enough for them to willingly die for it. So what seems useless myth becomes the essential thing of life.

Peter Sellick

A dark cloud remains over Solomon’s Temple!

The Lord hath said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." 2 Chronicles 6:1