From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Why I am an atheist (long!)
Organization: College Boyz (The John M Paradox)
	<18grj6INN58i@cardinal.ksu.ksu.edu>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:42:26 GMT

Jonathan W Newton writes:
J:1)  Is faith in christ required?

Paul Harvey writes:
P:Who defines the meaning of these words, God or human?

J:I refer to the faith mentioned in many passages of the bible.  My guess is 
J:that the meaning is of human origin.

Ah, I think that would be a good guess, now where does it lead you?

J:2)  Can god's existence be proven?

P:From a scientific/reductionism/logical viewpoint, no.

J:What are the other ways to prove the existence of god(s)?

Um, I think I'd better say none. The existance of god(s) is a near non-issue.

J:3)  Is the bible god's word to man?

P:All written word is written by human beings, excepting that written by chimps
P:and such. Now, that said, and given that the written word is created by the
P:human being, who created the human being?

J:Who says that man had to be created; how do you know there is such a thing as
J:causality.

I know of causality only because I observe it. I also know that I was created,
from nothing, that nothing being a few strands of genetic material. Perhaps
not nothing, but near nothing.

J:4) If so, why is it so inefficient at conveying his message?  Don't try to say
J:that the problem is man's fault either.  Who's fault is it when someone can't
J:understand the literature: the author or the reader?

P:Both. A story is only a story when there is a teller and a listener. This is
P:the Eastern sound of a tree falling when no one is there to hear.

J:You are still admitting that the author of the bible is at fault.

Fault, for what? When a story is over, then fault can be judged, if it so
pleases you. But this story is not yet over.

J:5)  Is the bible a compilation of metaphors?

P:It is a largely metaphorical work. It pertains to religion which is organized
P:mythology which pertains to myth which is metaphorical. That does not exclude
P:historical fact, for example the metaphorical work of Homer. If you want to
P:be serious about it, all written work is metaphorical, even the Yellow Pages.
P:It is the reader who "reads in to", thus making metaphorical. It is the
P:reader who is the judge, for the reader. Art is what you make of it.

J:6)  If so, why were metaphors used, since they result in very subjective
J:interpretations?  

P:Just for that reason. I believe it was Nietzsche, possibly Goethe, who said
P:that the best can not be said, the second best is not understood, that leaves
P:only metaphors as the third best way to "say". Metaphors transcend words, that
P:is why they have power, power of transcendence, transcendence of word.

J:1) I disagree 

You have that right.

J:2) that doesn't mean that metaphors are a perfect means of communication.

Absolutely correct! But, perhaps the only option? You know of others?

J:7)  Is the flood a myth (see your oxford nrsv)?

P:Yes, a very ancient and near universal one. It is obviously at the core of
P:what it means to be a human being. I take your meaning of myth in a positive
P:light, not the more common negative light. For a written word to be mythical
P:is the highest complement.

J:8)  If so, how do you know what is fact or fiction in the bible?  Why can't
J:everything be a myth?

P:If you look only for fact and fiction, you will miss the beauty of myth.

J:That is absolutely a pointless comment.  I do agree with it though.  I 
J:wouldn't be able to apreciate greek mythology if I looked at it strictly 
J:from one point of view. The difference is, I don't worship greek mythology 
J:while you worship christian mythology.

Well, I think it would be more correct to say that I worship all mythologies,
you see I am not a Christian. I am that I am. I am Homo sapiens sapiens,
thinking human. Sorry to disapoint you.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,talk.origins