This quote is taken from part of a comment that John Shuck left in his own blog:
To equate the main dogmas of Christianity with any of kind of reality save mythical and symbolic is incredible... Is the Apostle's Creed credible on any level except myth?I choose option #2.
The choice we have is to...
1) reject Christianity as absurd,
2) regard Christianity in a mythical, symbolic framework,
3) remain absurd.
As I noted in response to this, these three options correspond to what Marcus Borg describes as the three stages of faith: "pre-critical naivite" (option 3), "critical thinking" (option 1), and "postcritical naivite" (option 2).
John's use of the word "incredible" is interesting. His fellow Presbyterian, Jim Burklo, makes the point that belief in the incredible plays a large role in many people's lives--that's why we have Las Vegas.
2 comments:
Oddly enough, I find the main dogmas of Christianity credible.
If the main dogmas of Christianity are merely symbolic, why don't you skip the symbolism and deal directly with the reality they supposedly symbolize.
I.E., cut out the middleman!
If the main dogmas of Christianity are merely symbolic, why don't you skip the symbolism and deal directly with the reality they supposedly symbolize.
To a certain extent I agree; I don't feel any need to recite the Apostle's Creed and then interpret it symbolically, when I would personally prefer to just dispense with that creed altogether.
For me, the point is mostly that we should recognize the myths of Christianity for what they are, rather than taking them literally. Whether we then proceed to reiterate those myths ourselves is another question.
Post a Comment