my comment "ditch literalism if you want to enjoy life" was directed more at literalist believers who may suffer acutely trying to make a literalist interpretation actually work as a viable belief system. It's just a paraphrase of two bible verses.
the letter (literalism) kills but the spirit (metaphoric reference) gives life
and
if the blind follow the blind will they not both fall into a ditch
many have fallen into that ditch of literalism and it is not a pretty sight let alone a life affirming experience.
so to the christian i meant to say if you want to enjoy life more then ditch literalism and study the origins of your faith.
but that was not so much what you were saying so please let me address that, you said
i think it will suffice to stop short with the questionDWill wrote:Can you name anything comparable in mythology, where the god has a complete life as a human and gets involved in society in the way Jesus is shown to do?
Can you name anything comparable in mythology
i know that was not your question but indeed comparative mythology will unravel the whole confusing jesus mess.
the egyptians had the krst then the hindus have Krishna then we have the Christ of christianity then the Christ of the gnostics and the buddhists have the buddha
so if we study side by side krishna buddha christ and horus (just these four for starters) we find absolutely striking parallels
moreover if we then examine how the gnostics mythical christ who was a metaphoric reference to the transcendant within became literalised into the "literal historical christ" we then begin to see how this whole blunder got started.
then if we study mithra, attis, apis, tamuz, etc etc etc then mystery religions etc etc it all becomes clear that orthodox doctrine citing a literal historic christ is a perversion of an ancient doctrine that was pre-extant thousands of years before the supposed literal historic christ was even said to exist.
i've studied and lived this subject for getting on to 30 years and it wasnt until i got to comparative mythology and comparative religion that i began to untangle the unholy mess of literalism
not just christian literalism, there is buddhist literalism, hindu literalism, islamic literalism, jewish literalism etc etc etc
then there is understanding the metaphors
ok, if you insist on a literal jesus, prove it... (if you will)
a guy walks on water (literally) but no-one outside the bible mentions it hmmmmmm could it be jesus walking on the water is a metaphor for the christ (transcendant within) triumphing over adversity in matter (your body).
ok, what about the story of the slaughter of the infants
we read in hindu mythology that an evil King heard that the eighth child of a woman would be his undoing so he killed babies to prevent the prophecy from coming true, to no avail, the baby was hidden from him and indeed was his undoing...
here is a link to the story
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQBH1UoyyLI
this mythological motif is also echoed in the story of moses
so we have a major motif attributed to the historical jesus that was told many many years before the supposed historical christ was even supposed to have been born
the only reason literalism survives is because people do not know the sheer volume of parallels in the various ancient mythologies
go looking for the evidence for an historical jesus and you may just catch my point. Everyone just assumes that the case is open shut and that is a big mistake that a con-man will often use to advantage, people used to assume the earth was flat, another blunder.
after reading much material from many many authors it soon becomes obvious that the jesus of orthodox belief is a literalisation of the mythical christ who is a metaphor whose reference is to the immanent divine within us.
the bible itself is full of gnostic doctrine that predates the historical christ
christ in you the hope of glory
the kingdom is within
i am the vine you are the branches
so on and so forth
i know this subject well and i am convinced that once comparative religion and comparative mythology are studied for awhile only a willfully ignorant imbecile will fail to see the blindingly obvious.
to all those who insist on a literal historic jesus without having taken any time to know the subject in the histories and origins of the christian faith i can only hope that one day they will look and see for themselves that orthodox christianity can be reconstructed from materials that pre-date it by sometimes thousands of years.