As for me, I am not arguing that the Gospels are as fantastic as the Odyssey or the legends of King Arthur. I realize I am trying to describe color to a blind woman, but thought I'd give it a try.
What you argued was that it didn't make any difference whether the Gospels were as fantastic as the Odyssey or the legends of King Arthur.
I have argued that if the myth of the Odyssey offered grave danger to a people who already suffered gravely from earlier infusions of that myth, and if the myth of the Odyssey were on Wednesday to be presented dramatically and emotionally as historical truth, then, Cobe, the untruth of the myth does "make a difference," if not to you.
Faith is the will to believe in the absence of evidence, Cobe. It's a form of voluntary blindness.
The faith of yours you allude to in your spirited if goofy defense of the idea of this misleadingly advertised movie will be, if it kicks in when you see the movie, not only in the myths of the Gospel, but in those of "The Dolorous Passion," a book that will "melt a heart of stone," one hears, with the detail offered by its author of the suffering of Jesus and of his mother's participation, inflammatory details available by courtesy of the "visions" of a nun. Visions and myths.
It makes a difference if it makes a difference. The Jews, not you, will be the ones to know. |
