Kim Paffenroth's Gospel of the Dead

[Zombie-A-GoGo]

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e168/Dendle/2c7709cb.jpg (http://zagglit.blogspot.com/2006/08/gospel-of-dead-george-romeros-visions.html)


Kim Paffenroth’s Gospel of the Dead: George Romero’s Visions of Hell on Earth, despite not being a particularly difficult read, has turned out to be a difficult book to review. If you’re basing whether or not you want to read it solely on its title, you might find yourself a little misled. Written by a theology professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Iona College, a Catholic university, and published by Baylor University Press, a Baptist academy (part of whose mission is “to serve the academic community by producing works of excellent quality that integrate faith and understanding”)—this book is clearly a theological work but only seems so peripherally...

Read more here... (http://zagglit.blogspot.com/2006/08/gospel-of-dead-george-romeros-visions.html)

[HOO-HAA]

How completely bizarre....

I'd love to hear Richard Dawkins' reaction to this book... :lol:

[Zombie-A-GoGo]

How completely bizarre....

I'd love to hear Richard Dawkins' reaction to this book... :lol:


Dennett and Dawkins do Paffenroth! :lol:

[The Blind Dead]

K, you're a far better person than I. After receiving this in the mail and making it through about 3 chapters, I set it aside.

I've decided to write my own book called, "Patriarchy of the Dead". It'll be about my intepretation of Romero's original trilogy and how I believe he was really using zombies as a metaphor for...uh...*sigh*

There is such a thing as sucking every ounce of entertainment value from a series of films and I think Romero's have just about been deflated completely after this book. I honestly don't foresee not one more thing regarding his films that somebody could expound upon.

[The Blind Dead]

By the way...HOW DARE YOU USE A LINK TO YOUR REVIEW!

[evilzombie20]

By the way...HOW DARE YOU USE A LINK TO YOUR REVIEW!

I was waiting for that. :lol:

Very good review ZAGG, at least I won't be alone in this thread anymore! Hey peeps, got Hide and Creep, A Nightmare on Elm St, and Boogeyman today, expect reviews. :evil:

[Pain]

Nice review ZAGG, but i'll be avoiding this like the proverbial plague

[HOO-HAA]

Nice review ZAGG, but i'll be avoiding this like the proverbial plague

:lol: Nice biblical put-down, Pain... :clap:

My thoughts exactly, by the way....

[kpaffenroth]

My, my, so sorry you didn't like it.

[The Blind Dead]

Perhaps next book around.

[HOO-HAA]

Perhaps next book around.

You know I'm no fan of the overtly Christian, Kim - hence my avoidance of Gospel. Nothing personal. Just how I feel!

However, I am looking forward to picking up a copy of your less overtly Christian novel to be released through Permuted.:)

[kpaffenroth]

You know I'm no fan of the overtly Christian, Kim - hence my avoidance of Gospel. Nothing personal. Just how I feel!

However, I am looking forward to picking up a copy of your less overtly Christian novel to be released through Permuted.:)

To be honest, one of the Amazon reviews took me to task for not making the book MORE Christian. So, I can hardly hope to be all things to all people, but one knows that when one sits down to write.

Further, it seems to me it's one thing to say "This is a Christian analysis, and since I'm not a Christian, I don't find it particularly relevant." That sounds fair (and I believe was the tone of the original ZAGG review). I read Marxist and queer analyses of books and I don't find them as relevant as Marxists and homosexuals do, I'm sure. But if one says "A Christian analysis of these films is an insult to me and lessens my enjoyment of these films," then I don't quite understand that.

[HOO-HAA]

To be honest, one of the Amazon reviews took me to task for not making the book MORE Christian. So, I can hardly hope to be all things to all people, but one knows that when one sits down to write.



Perhaps the Amazon reviewer was a fundamentalist? Those guys just can't seem to get enough of the gospel! :lol:

Further, it seems to me it's one thing to say "This is a Christian analysis, and since I'm not a Christian, I don't find it particularly relevant." That sounds fair (and I believe was the tone of the original ZAGG review). I read Marxist and queer analyses of books and I don't find them as relevant as Marxists and homosexuals do, I'm sure. But if one says "A Christian analysis of these films is an insult to me and lessens my enjoyment of these films," then I don't quite understand that.

The problem for me, Kim, is that I find christianity fairly offensive in its own right and, therefore, don't enjoy hearing about a book like Gospel Of The Dead that seems to be trying to find a new way of evangelising. The gospel message is not one of hope, for me - it's one of exclusion. Exclusion to all who choose not to follow a particular way, a way that has inspired (and continues to inspire) wars, bigotry, racism, homaphobia etc.

I have studied religion at University, and experienced christianity whilst growing up from a variety of people - and very rarely in a positive way (especially in Northern Ireland). Below the veneer of shine jesus shine and god's great love, there always seem to be conditions - conditions which seem to me more about social control and power for key figures in whatever church you have encountered.

So, that's why I speak farily negative of the very concept of Gospel Of The Dead. But, as I say, it's nothing personal against you or your ability to write. You seem like a good guy and, from what I've read of your latest zombie novel, are an exciting writer of apocalyptic fiction. :)

[kpaffenroth]

[QUOTE=HOO-HAA;292198]Perhaps the Amazon reviewer was a fundamentalist? Those guys just can't seem to get enough of the gospel! :lol:

Oh, I wish they'd want a bit more of the Gospel and a bit less of Bush et al. But, that is another divisive conversation, to be sure. And I don't think this reviewer is a fundie: I just think he can only conceive of truth or enlightenment coming from the Bible and nowhere else. That's a mindset I try hard to overcome.

"The problem for me, Kim, is that I find christianity fairly offensive in its own right"

Aha. Well, that, to me is sad. It's also a reaction I get frequently. And given the public and vocal presentation of some Christians in the US (and from your description elsewhere as well) it's a very understandable impression that people have of Christianity. All I and my more reasonable coreligionists can do is try to present ourselves and the more positive aspects of the Gospel.

"and, therefore, don't enjoy hearing about a book like Gospel Of The Dead that seems to be trying to find a new way of evangelising."

This would be a very strange way to use my book. My intent throughout is twofold: 1) show Christians that grotesque images may have something important and positive to say; 2) show non-Christians that this "something positive" is (very broadly) Christian.

"The gospel message is not one of hope, for me - it's one of exclusion. Exclusion to all who choose not to follow a particular way, a way that has inspired (and continues to inspire) wars, bigotry, racism, homaphobia etc."

The book repeatedly tries to show that racism, violence, and homophobia are un-Christian attitudes. By your description, I guess you think these negative attitudes are so ingrained in Christianity that no Christian could agree or find anything useful in my book. You may be right, but in that case, it's not that the book it TOO Christian, it's that it's positively anti-Christian (by your definition of Christianity).

[The Blind Dead]

The book repeatedly tries to show that racism, violence, and homophobia are un-Christian attitudes.

While your book may try to show that racism, violence and homophobia aren't Christian attitudes, history has proven differently.

[kpaffenroth]

While your book may try to show that racism, violence and homophobia aren't Christian attitudes, history has proven differently.

Of course. So why would one object to a book that chastises Christians for behaving in such an un-Christian manner? I suppose one could argue that since Christians have behaved so badly in the last twenty centuries, that the religion should just be banned or members of it should be encouraged to leave the religion, and I actually have a fair number of colleagues in academia who try to do just that. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised at it, but it hardly seems very helpful to me, if the goal is to get Christians and others to behave in a more humane and civilized way.

[kpaffenroth]

But, tell you what, if everyone in the horror world likes my novel better than my nonfiction (e.g. - http://www.babysfirstzombie.com/2007/04/dying-to-live.html) then I'll just stick to hawking that to the horror people. Maybe some Christians will pick it up along the way and get some food for thought, too. I have no problem with that.

[HOO-HAA]

Of course. So why would one object to a book that chastises Christians for behaving in such an un-Christian manner? I suppose one could argue that since Christians have behaved so badly in the last twenty centuries, that the religion should just be banned or members of it should be encouraged to leave the religion, and I actually have a fair number of colleagues in academia who try to do just that. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised at it, but it hardly seems very helpful to me, if the goal is to get Christians and others to behave in a more humane and civilized way.

The only people who described themselves as christian that I ever had any time for were a group known as the Progressive Chrisitan Network (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Christianity). They seem a little more interested in kicking xianity into the 21st Century... some of them would even describe themselves as atheist, but atheists who still see some value in the less darker sides of the xian myth.

If I've been unfair to you, Kim, and your book, then I apologise. But, I still don't want to read it. And I still find xianity offenise for my previously stated reasons. Perhaps, you're in the very, very small minority of xians who stand against tides such as homophobia, piety, everyone-but-me-is-wrong etc. but your core religious group and your scriptures are certainly going with the tide, as opposed to against.

Either way, good luck with the book and I'm STILL looking forward to reading Dying To Live... :)

[kpaffenroth]

Thanks for your good wishes. I don't agree with the relative percentages of Christians who believe abhorrent things ("small minority" vs. "tide"), but I am used to finding myself apologizing for some of my coreligionists, as I said before, and I will continue to try to drag some of them into the 21st century.

[BFZ]

I'm not sure why anyone would be offended by this book. I'm no christian and when I read it I could see the christian elements in it. IMO, if you are offended by this book you may be a bit overly sensitive.

Now if you want to disagree with his anlysis or prose, that seems like fair game.

[HOO-HAA]

I'm not sure why anyone would be offended by this book. I'm no christian and when I read it I could see the christian elements in it. IMO, if you are offended by this book you may be a bit overly sensitive.

Now if you want to disagree with his anlysis or prose, that seems like fair game.

Again, I reiterate that I'm not offended by the book itself, but the ideology of christianity itself, which, of course, has rather heavily influenced the book.

Kim has, it seems, suggested that he often finds himself in the face of ridicule when he mentions he is a christian. I find that similar negativity flows towards me whenever I mention that I am anti-christian (which is not the same as anti-christ :lol: )...

We live in world that still has a justice system predominatly influenced by religion, and in the West that religion is predominatly christianity. Our marriages, births and deaths still are led by religious leaders - with all kinds of shit happening if we mix religions/ denominations/ Catholic Prtestant etc. HIV in Africa (and other countries) is rife due to poor birth control practice, heavily inspired by christian indoctrination. We go to war over religion, with our world leaders (including the Bushs and Blairs of this world) referring to their gods for assurance that they are in the right...

... surely it's not mere oversensitivity for me to have an axe to grind, here...

For me, religion is forced down our throats at every turn. I'd prefer it wasn't infecting (excse the pun) our zombie sub-genre... :)

[BFZ]

Again, I reiterate that I'm not offended by the book itself, but the ideology of christianity itself, which, of course, has rather heavily influenced the book.

Kim has, it seems, suggested that he often finds himself in the face of ridicule when he mentions he is a christian. I find that similar negativity flows towards me whenever I mention that I am anti-christian (which is not the same as anti-christ :lol: )...

We live in world that still has a justice system predominatly influenced by religion, and in the West that religion is predominatly christianity. Our marriages, births and deaths still are led by religious leaders - with all kinds of shit happening if we mix religions/ denominations/ Catholic Prtestant etc. HIV in Africa (and other countries) is rife due to poor birth control practice, heavily inspired by christian indoctrination. We go to war over religion, with our world leaders (including the Bushs and Blairs of this world) referring to their gods for assurance that they are in the right...

... surely it's not mere oversensitivity for me to have an axe to grind, here...

For me, religion is forced down our throats at every turn. I'd prefer it wasn't infecting (excse the pun) our zombie sub-genre... :)


meh, I don't see the need to be anti-any religion. Sure, I run into people who push their beliefs on others but I just tell them to buzz-off and the don't bother me anymore. No big deal.

Heck, my wife is catholic. I go to church with her, not to worship, but to support my wife. She does not ask me to go, I just do it for her.

I don't think that some done with a religious point of view make it invalid for non-religious people.

[HOO-HAA]

meh, I don't see the need to be anti-any religion. Sure, I run into people who push their beliefs on others but I just tell them to buzz-off and the don't bother me anymore. No big deal.

Heck, my wife is catholic. I go to church with her, not to worship, but to support my wife. She does not ask me to go, I just do it for her.

I don't think that some done with a religious point of view make it invalid for non-religious people.

I guess we all have an axe to grind. This is mine.

The weird thing is that both Kim and I, with our diversity of opinion on this issue, are with Permuted Press (see signature below). My book portrays christianity in a rather different light to Kim's, I would imagine.

But we're not (I think!) enemies. We just disagree. And that's okay... :)

[BFZ]

I guess we all have an axe to grind. This is mine.

The weird thing is that both Kim and I, with our diversity of opinion on this issue, are with Permuted Press (see signature below). My book portrays christianity in a rather different light to Kim's, I would imagine.

But we're not (I think!) enemies. We just disagree. And that's okay... :)

That's cool.

I'll most likely check out your book when it comes out. So far I'm really liking the Permuted Press stuff.

[HOO-HAA]

That's cool.

I'll most likely check out your book when it comes out. So far I'm really liking the Permuted Press stuff.

I'll keep you a reviewer's copy. Thanks, mate. :)

[kpaffenroth]

Having reached such a point of mutual understanding, I probably shouldn't stir things up again.

So let me just say, I've heard these and many similar accusations against Christianity many times before. I don't grant the accuracy of all of them, but I dont' want to get into arguing specific points. Since, as far as I'm concerned, there is an element of truth to them, it behooves me to do my best to work against such negative elements in Christianity. I also don't buy the "forced down our throats" characterization, at least in the USA. (I cannot speak to other countries.) I used to hear such accusations of the misdeeds of Christianity endlessly from my father, who died hating me for my faith, and I never once even talked to him about it or tried to discuss it with him, he just went after me for it. So suffice it to say that I respect someone's decision NOT to belong to Christianity (or any other religion), but I don't always sense a similar respect in the other direction.

Now, just because someone respects me, doesn't mean they have to read or buy my book. But I would underline what BFZ said: in the book I never once quote the Bible, I never say that Christians are better people than others, I never say that Christians would survive a zombie infestation better than others, I never say anyone who reads the book should go to church or pray or anything. All I say is that the depiction of zombie-ism (endless repetition of stupid activities like going to the mall, accompanied by insatiable hunger and violence) is very close to the Christian description of hell. And the depiction of the human characters in the movies - grasping, selfish, violent - matches up with the Christian idea of life under original sun. And I say that Christians are often homophobes, and the new Dawn of the Dead makes fun of them for that, which it should, as far as I'm concerned. So I do feel a little bit misrepresented if someone implies I'm some kind of crazed Bible thumper or mindless zealot or something. As BFZ also says, if it's just badly written or argued, then that's something else, and I'd apologize for any such shortcomings.

[HOO-HAA]

Having reached such a point of mutual understanding, I probably shouldn't stir things up again.

Every christian I've ever met wants the last word, Kim. Why is that? :lol:

So let me just say, I've heard these and many similar accusations against Christianity many times before. I don't grant the accuracy of all of them, but I dont' want to get into arguing specific points. Since, as far as I'm concerned, there is an element of truth to them, it behooves me to do my best to work against such negative elements in Christianity. I also don't buy the "forced down our throats" characterization, at least in the USA. (I cannot speak to other countries.) I used to hear such accusations of the misdeeds of Christianity endlessly from my father, who died hating me for my faith, and I never once even talked to him about it or tried to discuss it with him, he just went after me for it. So suffice it to say that I respect someone's decision NOT to belong to Christianity (or any other religion), but I don't always sense a similar respect in the other direction.

I'm sorry that this caused such problems with your father. Interestingly enough, my family are quite religious and my *lack* of faith has caused problems between us.

So there we have it. We've both been damaged by religion.

Now, just because someone respects me, doesn't mean they have to read or buy my book.

Likewise! :)

But I would underline what BFZ said: in the book I never once quote the Bible, I never say that Christians are better people than others, I never say that Christians would survive a zombie infestation better than others, I never say anyone who reads the book should go to church or pray or anything. All I say is that the depiction of zombie-ism (endless repetition of stupid activities like going to the mall, accompanied by insatiable hunger and violence) is very close to the Christian description of hell. And the depiction of the human characters in the movies - grasping, selfish, violent - matches up with the Christian idea of life under original sun. And I say that Christians are often homophobes, and the new Dawn of the Dead makes fun of them for that, which it should, as far as I'm concerned. So I do feel a little bit misrepresented if someone implies I'm some kind of crazed Bible thumper or mindless zealot or something. As BFZ also says, if it's just badly written or argued, then that's something else, and I'd apologize for any such shortcomings.

But we should be able to debate over the validity of the project, Kim, especially if it's non-fiction. And we should be able to do it without you taking it personally, although from what we have both learned about our respective pasts, it's understandable why we both are sensitive to this topic.

The xian bible (including the new testament) to me (having studied it) is full of negativity. Take, for example, much of what St Paul says concerning women, homosexuality etc. What about the judaic christian commandments? God admits to being jealous and non-inclusive. Is that maybe why his followers are, too?

Of course, if you want to change/ amend/ edit the bible, there is something of value in there for living life - as there is within all faiths/ religions etc. But the Patriarchal blind obediance at the heart of fundamentalist adherance to the very dots of every word written is destroying our world - and xianity is up there swinging with the best of them...

In any case, we're heading into stormy waters, here. So I'll leave the last word to Jesus, if he has an internet connection, what with him being one of the all-time most popular zombies. :)

[kpaffenroth]

[QUOTE=HOO-HAA;292329]Every christian I've ever met wants the last word, Kim. Why is that? :lol:"

That is human nature. I've never met anyone from any stripe who didn't want the last word, and didn't want to be right.

"So there we have it. We've both been damaged by religion."

No, I think we've both been hurt by intolerance. I have already admitted that Christians are guilty of this. I hope they can learn to be less so.

"But we should be able to debate over the validity of the project, Kim, especially if it's non-fiction. And we should be able to do it without you taking it personally,"

I don't think I took anything personally, except to say that the statement "This book is too Christian for me" might lead people to assume things about me or the book that I don't think are accurate.

"The xian bible (including the new testament) to me (having studied it) is full of negativity."

This is a sweeping generalization. It is certainly possible to come up with a very warped worldview and then proof text it from the Bible, and I have already admitted Christians have done just that, but I don't see that as the only way to read the Bible.

" Take, for example, much of what St Paul says concerning women, homosexuality etc."

Again, this is how many Christians have wanted to take Paul, so as to support their own views of woman and homosexuals. Paul only makes one statement about male homosexuals, and none about female homosexuals. (His one statement on male homosexuals seems to imply that their homosexuality itself is the punishment for their sins, which is not how fundies interpret homosexuality today.) His statements on women are conflicted and open to great debate today as to which letters Paul really wrote. Again, it says a lot about Christian history and human nature that those letters most negative about women have been grabbed on to for so much of history. And now, I would say, we can let go of them.

"What about the judaic christian commandments? God admits to being jealous and non-inclusive. Is that maybe why his followers are, too?"

Backwards: people project their own insecurity and fear on to God, and make Him the big bully who will protect them. And, I should note, if they don't project their insecurities there, they'll probably project them somewhere else - such as the state or technology - with equally inhumane and disastrous results. The body counts for the atheist regimes of the 20th century would make any Inquisitor or Crusader or Jihadist blush.

[HOO-HAA]

I see where you're going, and I would agree that human nature is at play within the bible and all world faiths. You see, that suits my point of view. Religion is a human invention. Scripture is without inspiration from any god - it's simply the meanderings of oft misguided humans (predominantly male). If you decide to remove bits and pieces, such as some of Paul's epistles, are you not in some way admitting to the general irrelevance of xianity? How do you decide what to keep and what to throw away? Is it just a matter of opinion? Human opinion?

In that sense, you're heading away from literal or even liberal xianity and more towards progressive xianity. And, you know what the next stop is from there?

Yep. Agnosticism. Or perhaps atheism. Or you could try a couple of other religions on the way... :)

[kpaffenroth]

Yes, this is why anything other than Fundamentalism is so frightening to so many people, and I can understand why: they scream "Oh no! You're threatening EVERYTHING!!" Can't help it. It's a risk we have to take, unless religion is going to become exactly as inhumane and irrelevant as you accuse it of being. So yes, there will be opinions and debate w/in religions if they evolve into the 21st century.

I do NOT believe Scripture is merely a human construction. To be totally honest, I don't even believe that about Shakespeare or Augustine or Romero: anything that is true or beautiful is God speaking, usually through human beings. Those human beings, as we seem to agree, are quite fallible, and therefore the message never comes through undiluted or undistorted.

[HOO-HAA]

To be totally honest, I don't even believe that about Shakespeare or Augustine or Romero: anything that is true or beautiful is God speaking, usually through human beings. Those human beings, as we seem to agree, are quite fallible, and therefore the message never comes through undiluted or undistorted.

A good point, and very well made. :)

But, should we not go all the way, allowing ourselves to be courageous enough to say - "hey, that was me who wrote that. Not God. Not some bigger thing than I, but ME." ?

Shouldn't we believe in the beauty and genius and wonder and mystery within ourselves, rather than attributing it to some 'god' or 'higher being' and leaving only the dregs for ourselves?

I believe in humanity. I LOVE the cocktail of emotions and gifts and opinions and expressions and good and bad and neither-good-nor-bad that makes each and every muther-feckin' one of us up. I love writing about us, and believing in the characters I write about because they are HUMAN. Not inspired, but INSPIRING.

[kpaffenroth]

[QUOTE=HOO-HAA;292342]
"Shouldn't we believe in the beauty and genius and wonder and mystery within ourselves, rather than attributing it to some 'god' or 'higher being' and leaving only the dregs for ourselves?"

I can't argue AGAINST such a explanation or experience. And I'm not sure you'd have to leave yourself ONLY the dregs (though I have to admit, when I look at how badly I mess things up, I'm more inclined to give myself credit for the screw ups than the triumphs). But, for myself and many others, the experience of beauty and truth is enhanced when I attribute it to another being. The Grand Canyon? Just a big hole? Hard for me to believe. The experience of real, committed love? Just hormones and chemicals sloshing around in the glands and the brain-box? I guess I can't disprove it, but it doesn't sound ultimately too convincing or edifying. And really, suppose I love people because I believe love is a commandment of God and even an extension of God's own being - how is that really going to feel different (to me or the people being loved) than if I say I have all this love to give from myself?

And yes, I know what you mean about loving your characters, making them as good and interesting and complex as you can.

[kpaffenroth]

And let it be known - I restarted the whole thread by being snarky and sarcastic, but Hoo-Haa raised the conversation to a better level. So, remember: don't forget to be snarky, but don't forget to let go of your snarkiness, Grasshopper. If you do not control your snarkiness, your snarkiness will control you.

[The Blind Dead]

And let it be known - I restarted the whole thread by being snarky and sarcastic

So, that's what future critics have to look forward to when reviewing your work? :roll:

[kpaffenroth]

Yes, though I can learn from my mistakes, and something good can come of it. And I can poke fun at myself. So I hope it's not too bad of a mix.

[HOO-HAA]

Kim, I think we've wrapped up here? :)

When it comes down to it, I guess we both just have different opinions - equally worthy.

For what it's worth, you have been the most interesting xian I have ever talked with, and I've enjoyed our discussion/ debate immensely.

I've also learned not to tar all xians with my one brush. Perhaps to do so is the road to fundamentalism in itself? :)

Good luck with both Gospel Of The Dead and Dying to Live.

[kpaffenroth]

Thanks! And let's remember - all this from the fine folks at Permuted!

[kpaffenroth]

I guess this gal was more what you had in mind every time "Christian" was mentioned:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8Aq00yJSxo&eurl=

Now that's some wrath of God stuff.

[BFZ]

I'll keep you a reviewer's copy. Thanks, mate. :)

Sounds good, just drop me an email when you finish it.

[MADMAN]

I just wanted to throw in my two cents here.

Having been raised Catholic, and spent twelve years in Catholic school, I to find the majority of organized religion borderline offensive. Which is not to say that I find Christianity offensive, rather, its the human corruptions that have occurred in its organized aspect. All of this has of course been mentioned.

Ultimately, I just wanted to point out that much of the bible that we know was selected maybe a thousand years after the death of Christ and its passages were selected and translated in such a way as to keep the ruling males of the Roman Catholic Church in their lofty positions. But ultimately, with all of that, two truths remain clear: Do unto others as you would have done to you, and Love thy neighbor as thyself. I think that if we strive to do these two things everything else will fall into place. And I think that was intended to be the core nature of The Way when it was first conceived.

That is not to say that this thread hasn't been phenomenal, b/c it has. I can only term it as wonderful that two posters of such opposed viewpoints can come together and rationally and relatively amicably discuss a topic about which they are obviously both passionate. It is a testament to the quality of posters on this site, and you guys in particular.

Anyway, that's all I have to say.

On Topic: I, like Hoo Haa have a tendency to avoid anything overtly Christian because I have found much overtly Christian literature to be relatively intolerant. However, after reading Kim's posts here I am very intrigued by this project.

[HOO-HAA]

I just wanted to throw in my two cents here.

Having been raised Catholic, and spent twelve years in Catholic school, I to find the majority of organized religion borderline offensive. Which is not to say that I find Christianity offensive, rather, its the human corruptions that have occurred in its organized aspect. All of this has of course been mentioned.

Ultimately, I just wanted to point out that much of the bible that we know was selected maybe a thousand years after the death of Christ and its passages were selected and translated in such a way as to keep the ruling males of the Roman Catholic Church in their lofty positions. But ultimately, with all of that, two truths remain clear: Do unto others as you would have done to you, and Love thy neighbor as thyself. I think that if we strive to do these two things everything else will fall into place. And I think that was intended to be the core nature of The Way when it was first conceived.

That is not to say that this thread hasn't been phenomenal, b/c it has. I can only term it as wonderful that two posters of such opposed viewpoints can come together and rationally and relatively amicably discuss a topic about which they are obviously both passionate. It is a testament to the quality of posters on this site, and you guys in particular.

Anyway, that's all I have to say.

On Topic: I, like Hoo Haa have a tendency to avoid anything overtly Christian because I have found much overtly Christian literature to be relatively intolerant. However, after reading Kim's posts here I am very intrigued by this project.


MADMAN, I re-read the thread after reading your post. It's a good debate and I love to hear other people's opinions on the subject...

Last night I was out on the beer (have a very groovy head now :lol:) and was talking, as ever, about this subject with a friend of mine who would describe himself as atheist (although I reckon he'd be more agnostic).

It's an important topic, with different viewpoints. What interests me is that most people, regardless of the fact that religion is woven throughout society's life, kind of don't really care about it. They are kind of 'meh' about it... which interests me, considering how much it is affecting just about everything around us...