From: "Rich Gauszka" 

I did a cursory read of his intro and excerpts.  I disagree with the
premise that religion even in moderation is a menace.     My beliefs are
more akin
to Joseph Campbell  -  that humanity needs/requires myth.

It seems odd that he draws on insights in eastern mysticism ( which would
seem to require faith )  but  I'm not sure what he's using that 'insight'
to prove. The hardcover appears to be at my local Border's Books so I may
give it a look when I visit tomorrow.



"Randy H"  wrote in message
news:4328b1be{at}w3.nls.net...
> Try this on for size:
>
> http://www.samharris.org/
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:43282259$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>> "Ellen K."  wrote in message
>> news:kqdfi1ludgd7r95aqqosfs6b4vlungfulg{at}4ax.com...
>>> One I find particularly egregious underpins the Christian doctrine of
>>> the virgin birth.  The word Christians translate as
"virgin" does not
>>> mean "virgin", it means a young woman.  There is an
exact word that
>>> means "virgin" which appears many times in the
Bible, which is not the
>>> one used.  The Bible is not shy about these things, if
"virgin" was
>>> meant, the word for virgin would have been used.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> FWIW some Catholic theologians agree with you. Many ( myself included )
>> feel that the virgin birth mythology was more a product of pagan
>> religious influence - keeping the story of the birth in context with
>> other mythical heroes/gods  of the populace
>>
>> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15448a.htm
>> The Jewish Origin Theory (Isaias 7:14)
>>
>> A second class of writers derive the early Christian tradition of the
>> virgin birth from Jewish Christian influence. Harnack [39] is of the
>> opinion that the virgin birth originated from Isaias 7:14; Lobstein [40]
>> adds the "poetic traditions surrounding the cradle of Isaac,
Samson, and
>> Samuel" as another source of the belief in the virgin birth. Modern
>> theology does not grant that Isaias 7:14, contains a real prophecy
>> fulfilled in the virgin birth of Christ; it must maintain, therefore,
>> that St. Matthew misunderstood the passage when he said: "Now all this
>> was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet,
>> saying; Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a
son," etc.
>> (1:22-23). How do Harnack and Lobstein explain such a misunderstanding on
>> the part of the Evangelist? There is no indication that the Jewish
>> contemporaries of St. Matthew understood the prophet's words in this
>> sense. Hillmann [41] proves that belief in the virgin birth is not
>> contained in the Old Testament, and therefore cannot have been taken from
>> it. Dalman [42] maintains that the Jewish people never expected a
>> fatherless birth of the Messias, and that there exists no vestige of such
>> a Jewish interpretation of Isaias 7:14.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5