"What we need is an educational program that teaches the two realms just as literature is taught alongside natural science...this must be done so that the historical/imaginative construct of Christian theology is given equal weight for being “true” as it does that of natural science.

??

That's a huge call. But if so, all faiths - all thirty thousand or so of them - should be included. Being popular doesn't make it any right or any more true.

I think the article can be summed up as "ignorance is bliss".

Or was.

All,
The Hebraic-Christian and Hellenistic traditions certainly underpin Western civilization, and for good reason. What is lost, when the basis for these values decline, allows the formation of a totalitarian system or authoritarian state, as you suggest. Neither of these can tolerate those who have an absolute by which to judge the state or ‘system’ for its actions.

The egocentrism of ‘Sir’ Oswald Mosley is clearly evident in his autobiography. He was an aristocratic fascist who said, ”the blackshirt movement in the thirties was the only guarantee of free speech in Britain, and a spirit which was banished from our country”. Despite being anti-communist, his inspiration was drawn from a type of Marxist materialism. He considered himself a genuine British socialist and willed the social revolution he believed necessary through means of his fascist brigade of thugs. His ambiguity, initially, was such that for a very brief time Churchill and Bevan alike were keen for him to lead their respective parties. Fortunately, the British eventually recognised him for what he was, as they did eventually with Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers' Party.

Peter,
Thank you for a thought provoking article. I can see why it attracted such a response in which “Jung, no doubt, would see a repression of the religious instinct“, as relda so aptly put it.

The replacement of the Christian story with that of natural science would be - rather than has been - a disaster, because I am not sure a replacement is always taking place. I think the “Christian story“ is simply being ignored but I also think that a return to the past, where the “Christian story telling” ignored the insights of modern science, would also be a disaster. The car replaced walking and horse-riding but the solution to the ensuing lack of exercise is not a return to the past, but sport and fitness centres. A new solution is needed also here: for instance, RE teachers able to interpret scientific and religious (e.g. Christian) insights in such a way that students understand that they do not have to contradict each other.

As to the subjective nature of religion, I do not know if this is OK, but since I have to wait 12 hours before I can post a reply to relda on another thread, may I post here a part of it:

I personally believe that the Divine/Spiritual has both objective and subjective (individual as well as of humanity as such) features. It cannot be reduced to either, only one of its features can be suppressed by this or that individual or school of thought. This probably comes from my experience with “doing mathematics“ where it is also hard to tell whether one creates (the subjective feature) or discover (the objective feature).

Since quantum physics, this clear distinction (between the observer and observed) became problematic even in the philosophy of science. A lot of misunderstandings - including those manifested in derogatory remarks about religion and faith on this OLO - arise when one strictly separates what is subjective and what is objective when dealing with what “really exists“. “Epistemology models ontology” is a favourite saying of John Polkinghorne, the physicist-theologian I often refer to.

Fasctinating:)

aaah.. Poor Pericles out there like a shag on a rock.. and his bedraggled cormorant friend CJ hanging his wings out to dry nearby...

*grin*... sorry guys.. I have to have a bit of a poke at you's sometimes eh.

"arrogant and odious" ....

"fear and loathing" (from another thread)

Seems like Perilous is compiling a book of '2 worders' to sell at the next meeting of "Atheists_All_Over"

Some guidance for Pericles who sees everything as "how people interpret it"

CHRISTIANITY 101.

-Mankind is alienated from its Creator.
-Mankind has a natural tendency to err, because of that alienation. (The fall)
-Jesus came with a message "Repent"(from sin).. and "Believe"(in Him)
-He taught many parables..stories illustrating from many angles the nature of the "Kindgdom of God"
-Faith in Christ transforms people from that fallen state by undeserved kindness (Grace) and results in reconciliation with/to the Creator. ("we must be born..again")

-In Him, we are now children of God, and members of his Family, and are assured of forgiveness of sin and eternal life.

-When we do the above, we are sealed with the Holy Spirit, the fruit of whom is "Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Self control etc"
No, we do not manifest those characteristics 100% of the time, as 'automatons' we still err...but are restored. Repentance is not just a 'one point in time' event, it is a life process.

-All of the above is well founded on the miracles, teaching and resurrection of the Lord, confirmed by the conversion of Saul, and the Scriptures.

"That" is the truth of the Christian story. Yes, there is much more.. many depths to be plumbed, but it always comes back to the above.

Well said Peter. Some of the venom that pours out in these comments tends to reinforce your point. Dawkins et al and their absolute certainty remind me of another famous atheist (Bertrand Russell)who said that the main problem with the world is that "fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, while wiser heads are full of doubt".

You do so love taking quotes out of context Boaz. It is a bad habit that you should make an effort to eradicate.

>>"arrogant and odious"... Seems like Perilous is compiling a book of '2 worders' to sell at the next meeting of "Atheists_All_Over"<<

These two words were used to describe the attitude of a poster who presumed to insult non-Christians by describing them as "Dawkins/Harris/Dennett epigones".

It was a very specific attribution, not a generalization. That you try to distort it so does you no credit.

>>"fear and loathing" (from another thread)<<

That speaks for itself. So far out of context, it even has to be dragged in from another thread.

Truly, you are a shameless piece of work, Boaz.

>>Some guidance for Pericles who sees everything as "how people interpret it"<<

What is staggering about this little barb is that I was merely observing that Sells himself is fast approaching this particular standpoint, and has the courage to admit it.

"Their truth does not rely on whether they actually happened just as the truth of any story does not depend on historicity. But with any story it is the exercise of the imagination that is crucial for them to reveal their meaning."

Please explain to me, Boaz, how an individual can "exercise the imagination" in anything but a subjective manner?

I live in a city of five million people, in a prosperous and educated country. Would I, do you think, "exercise my imagination" and arrive at precisely the same conclusion as, say, a Berber tribesman?

What else could anyone's imagination be, except subjective?

You would do well to heed your colleague, Eckadimmock, who quotes Bertrand Russell.

"fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, while wiser heads are full of doubt"

Do you ever entertain doubt, Boaz?