On Feb 10, 2010, at 11:01:38 PM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: Hello Steve,
I would argue that Campbell was being disingenuous in his argument. I saw the Moyer's series when first run, in 1988 did you say? and remember thinking this at the time. He was pandering to fundamentalists with his assertions about atheists. He set up a straw man atheist to knock down so that he would be viewed as fair-minded. He was right in his objections to fundamentalists casting mythology as historical fact and thus ruining it for everybody, but wrong in his objections to atheists doing the same. Atheists do no such thing. We are fully aware that biblical mythology is to be understood as metaphor. We also see the beauty in it, and appreciate it for what it is, but fundamentalism makes every effort to rob us and everyone else of that pleasure, and we object. The bible has many good and wise and useful things to say. What atheist's object to is the twisting of that into unyielding 'historical' fact. If fundamentalists were not around to do so, atheists would certainly not be proclaiming that it was. If fundamentalist's were not so aggressively in our faces with their 'facts', we would all be able to relax and appreciate the many beautiful stories, lessons, and metaphors in the bible. Personally, I resent that fundamentalists have stolen the beauty from my bible and made it difficult to appreciate what is found there. They would do well to remember that it is not "their" bible, it is everyone's. Mary Hi Mary, And I would respond, that the way you see things is also a metaphor. At least according to Pirsig, and I agree. If you think your metaphor is better, more power to you. The concept of history came from the Jewish tribes many years ago, and it was for religious reasons. Mark Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
