Whoah there!

I’m only able to give a very quick response now, I’m up to my peepers in a project that has a fixed deadline and is running very late, so only a cursory reply for now.

I tend to write carefully, it is my job. Have a go at reading this thread a little more slowly and you might get a better grip on what I am actually talking about. It doesn’t really have much to do with fitting in with your model (if I am understanding that at all). It might be that your perception of mythic narrative will not allow for an easy understanding of what I am saying - if so we can leave it at that because it’s OK.

You said “philosophy is based on speculation as you suggested and myth and it has led us to believe that truth is Absolute. Since science (the theory of relativity) has undermined this view” Actually, I said nothing like this, and I don’t think these statements bear much scrutiny. Philosophy, based on speculation and myth leads to absolutism? Science leads to relativism? What can I say… this is quite a distinctive approach!

But I do agree with you on the dominant issues of justice and relationship and, presumably, community. These I share.

Relates: you can’t have read me very carefully if you think you are introducing something by mentioning Hitler and myth, take another look above.

I realise that you don’t like myth, and if you feel the need to react like this you must dislike it a lot. But on a quick reading of your post I’d have to say that I’m not sure how well you understand its role as a common form of human narrative that is as present in scripture as anywhere and is nothing to be afraid of.

If I understand you, you seem to be saying that there is only covenantal truth, all else is ‘speculation’. Is this a fair description? This would be, to put it mildly, a rather individual epistemology. But not an uninteresting one.

A more considered response when I get time.