RE: MD Philosophy and Theology

From: David Buchanan (
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 19:58:52 BST

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD Patterns"

    Sam and all:

    Sam said:
    I largely agree with this. I would want to add (which I think you would
    agree with) that the misinterpretation derives from SOM/Modernist thinking -
    and as such, I would say that the misinterpretation was not current in
    'classical' Christianity.

    dmb says:
    Classical Christianity? The problem is a clash between religion and science,
    or more specifically, theology and philosophy. Naturally, this could not
    have been an issue before the rise and development of Modern science and
    philosophy. In pre-modern times there was not yet any genuine rivals to
    religion and the concepts and worldviews upon which this conflict would be
    based had yet to be formed. Besides, are we not talking about the
    contemporary world?

    Sam said:
    I would (obviously) disagree about the extent to which particular
    mythologies are dead - they're dead for you, but that doesn't mean that they
    are necessarily dead for other people - but otherwise, I agree. I think that
    a mythology *can* die.

    dmb says:
    Again, are we not talking about the contemporary world? Myths might be
    important to you or me, but I'd argue that its not about you or me. The
    death of religion in the West is pretty much an historical fact. Contrary to
    appearences, the rise of fundamentalism, i believe, does not represent a
    resurrection of religion, but is a symptom of its decay. It is the weeping
    and wailing at God's wake.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 19:59:55 BST