I definitely don't think that fears around the topics of hell and sex are exclusive to Catholicism and I am sure that many people from other Christian denominations experience fear and anxiety in relation to these. Personally, I have spoken to many people raised in the Catholic church who have spoken about these. Some of these have become Buddhists in response to the need for a religion which is free from this fear.

At least, within Catholicism there is regular confession, thought of as a sacrament, and absolution of sin. I am not sure that confessions features as strongly in other denominations. But, of course, forgiveness of sins should play an important role. We do get a picture of Jesus having his feet washed by Mary Magdalene, the prostitute, and him forgiving her sins.

I have never had much discussion with anyone from an Islamic background on the topic of hell or sex to know their exact experiences, but from my reading of the Islamic faith, I would imagine that Muslims would probably have a lot to worry about too.

Re your statement: "I think the mystery of existence necessarily points to something beyond our everyday experience. That is, recognizing the existence of God is the rational inference from our being here, in my opinion.

I agree with the first half.

But then you say: "to something beyond our everyday experience." Agreed, but the words: "Something" point to nothing specific. Nothing at all. That something could be any one of dozens of different possibiities. The existence of a "God" or rather "the son of a God" is certainly not the most probabable possibility. I might suggest it is the least probable.

I think that you are correct to see the idea of an unseen order as being an aspect of science. I think that the idea can be used in a religious or scientific context equally. Sometimes, I think when people see the concept of an unseen order, the associations conjured up are of magic, mysticism and the supernatural arise. Perhaps the word supernatural would be regarded as almost a swear word in some philosophy circles, although I once read a book by Lyall Watson called, 'Supernatural' in which he was using to describe order and patterns in biology and nature, rather than in a hidden order of spiritual beings.

I think that we were replying at the same time, so I have just read your latest comment. I think I leave a certain amount of ambiguity about the idea of the unseen order, whether I would place it in the ranking of the 'divine' or 'science' because I simply don't know how to define it in an ultimate way.

I don’t mean I believe in the Greek gods. What I mean is, that imaginative realm is far richer than the picture in which human life is simply the outcome of the random collocations of atoms. — Wayfarer

A random collection of goofy gods is imaginatively richer than a random collection of atoms? Frankly, the later requires more imagination. I could never have dreamt up nuclear physics on my own, and have only the most basic concept of it now. A person could spend a lifetime studying and theorizing about it.

Like @Jack Cummins, you seem to think that myth has value in religion, and in the absence of myth life is somehow spiritually barren or less meaningful.

A neglectful thread host, Jack as thus far not addressed the question of how myth expresses its value in religion. Perhaps you or someone else will?

I am a born again atheist and I deny that my life is desolate and barren. I have all of life, all of literature, all of science and, indeed all of philosophy including this philosophy forum'
I have all of art. I, myself, am an artist.
I even have you, to liven things up.

At least, within Catholicism there is regular confession, thought of as a sacrament, and absolution of sin. I am not sure that confessions features as strongly in other denominations. But, of course, forgiveness of sins should play an important role. We do get a picture of Jesus having his feet washed by Mary Magdalene, the prostitute, and him forgiving her sins. — Jack Cummins

Just bear in mind that it is easy to jump to conclusions. Confession is not a significant part of all Catholic practice these days and is diminishing. Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute. This is not supported or even hinted at in any of the Biblical texts. It's a folk tradition - like so much unquestioned nonsense in life.

I consider confession to be a very valuable form of mental therepy but also, I am witness, it can contribute to licentiousness. "Okay, we're forgiven, now we con go out and do it again."

Myth is an extremely complex but interesting topic. One of the problems with the term myth is its colloquial use to mean false. I embrace it in the sense of the whole idea of symbolic dimensions. There is so much interesting reading in this area from the writings of James Campbell, Carl Jung and Mircea Eliade. In thinking of the mythical we are talking about a whole dimension of experience of trying to capture truths.

We have the whole story of Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden as a starting point. This has caused a lot of controversy and, really, if you think about it the account probably was part of oral history which got written down and some people have taken it all so literally, when it was never written down on the first day of creation, like a newspaper report.

One mythical idea which I find fascinating is the whole idea of the fall of the angels and the consequent fall of mankind. I was taught this very strongly as a child and when I tried to explore this idea I discovered that it is more based on Milton's 'Paradise Lost' than the Bible. However, if you look in esoteric literature there are all kinds of ideas about the fall of Atlantis and Nephilim giants who ruled the earth. It is so hard to know if this is pure imagination.

Myth fascinates me and it encompasses all the comparative religious perspectives. One of the best resources which we have is art and I am thinking of all the riches within religious icons of Christianity, Hindu art and statues of all the gods and goddesses and the many other varieties of symbols. The symbolic dimensions are endless and we can begin to access them in our dreams or in out of body experiences. Some Eastern thinkers speak of this dimensions as the 'astral plane' but I would guess than many philosophers would be very suspicious of this concept.

I have read some of a book, 'The Physics of Transfigured Light: The Imaginal Realm and the Hermetic Foundations of Light' , James Marvell (2016) which suggest that there is an imaginary dimension, which is objectively real and the author even suggests that it is from this realm may even that from which Plato's forms are derived. However, when we get into the whole question of dimensions beyond us so much is speculation and, as much as I am fascinated by the imaginary it is possible to go off into tangents, but I do think that the nature of myth, should have a place, like religion, in the philosophy.

So are you saying that this is your experience and the benefit of "going for it"? If your child or loved one got diagnosed with terminal cancer, for example, you'd be okay with it and not suffer at all because of it? — praxis

I will tell you from experience because I have lost a son. It was his death that prompted me to embark on a very serious philosophical journey that morphed into my Zen Path.

Those who truly "go for it" are generally people who have come out of a very serious life episode (as did I). In a Zen sense, when something really bad happens, you want to be with that 100%, not only so you can react in the most efficacious manner (i.e.,see what's taking place with the greatest clarity), but just as important, you want to let go as soon as possible because the real suffering in life is many times not from the event itself, but instead, the emotional reaction to the event.

So, by building "your center," you have the strength to withstand whatever comes your way, deal with it the most effective way possible, and then move-on (which is the solution to all life's issues).

What you are saying shows how we are all taught differently. I am interested to know what ideas you have and sources you have for alternative pictures of Mary Magdalene. I have come across some people who think that she was Jesus's partner, but it is hard to come up with clear evidence. There is even so much written about Jesus and the tomb after his death, the Grail tradition so much more. It could be much more than one lifetimes of research really, and one area of exploration opens up many more.

I think that you are right that the people who explore beyond the accepted norms are often those who have reason to do so, as you have shared in your personal experience. I was pushed to question and go searching through difficult circumstances too, mainly knowing 2 people while I was university, and1 a year later, who committed suicide. I do believe that it is only through truly painful life experiences that most individuals are inclined to really search, because as you have said in previous posts the majority of people would rather settle for the comforts of the norms.

In thinking of the mythical we are talking about a whole dimension of experience of trying to capture truths. — Jack Cummins

Okay, what's the value of packaging truths this way?

So are you saying that this is your experience and the benefit of "going for it"? If your child or loved one got diagnosed with terminal cancer, for example, you'd be okay with it and not suffer at all because of it?
— praxis

I will tell you from experience because I have lost a son. It was his death that prompted me to embark on a very serious philosophical journey that morphed into my Zen Path. — synthesis

There's a saying that spiritual life begins with the introduction of pain.

Those who truly "go for it" are generally people who have come out of a very serious life episode (as did I). — synthesis

And maybe after a nice simple balanced life. Nothing wrong with that!

Sorry for being obscure. What I am trying to say is that myth is a whole perspective or way of viewing experience, incorporating symbols. I am also saying that it is one way of trying to grasp 'truth.'

That is why it is named: "Unseen"

I don't think you're being obscure.

What I am trying to say is that myth is a whole perspective or way of viewing experience, incorporating symbols. I am also saying that it is one way of trying to grasp 'truth.' — Jack Cummins

Right, what I'm asking is what's the value of this method? There are other ways of viewing experience and grasping truth. How is that value expressed?

You are asking an extremely difficult question really, in asking about the value of myth. It all comes down to perspectives on truth: religious knowledge and myths as 'truth'? How do we evaluate it ultimately. In Kant's system of ideas we have a priori knowledge. Jung suggested 4 ways of knowing: sensation, rationality, feeling and intuition. Perhaps, it is much more even much more complex. Probably, each one of us will come to a slightly different conclusion but I am not saying that it can all be reduced to relativism. I am more of a pluralist, in seeing a picture of competing pictures of truths which we put together and try and make sense of, individually.I think that myths are important, personally, but I recognise that many do not regard the mythic perspective as of great importance.

The term 'unseen' is one which can be interpreted in many ways, like 'hidden'. These terms can be used by a born again atheist like yourself. On the other hand, that is also the language of the mystical or esoteric philosophers. You might even be a 'mystical atheist.' That seems an interesting concept, like a born again atheist.

What you are saying shows how we are all taught differently — Jack Cummins

Some of us are taught the wrong things. All religions are encrusted in a separate folklore which does not come from any holy books. I think your first step is to get to know the official tradition from the scriptures - if that material interests you. Only then mess about with alternative narratives and traditions and myths and Dan Brown style nonsense.

That seems an interesting concept, like a born again atheist. — Jack Cummins

All that atheism is is the rejection of the proposition that a God exists. It says nothing about a person's other beliefs. Many people who call themselves atheists believe in the occult, mysticism, numerology, astrology or other supernatural material. 'Born again atheist' is a meaningless term - born again has a specific meaning in some Christian traditions and refers to a believer's relationship with Christ.

You say about spending time reading the scriptures. I have known people who have attended all kinds of Bible study groups, or even read the Bible cover to cover. Even then, it comes down to interpretation. There are differences between the Gospels and a lot of speculation over who were the real authors, as it is likely that they were written long after the death of Jesus. Apart from anything else, there is the hold field of debates in theology and a lot of questions about how the Bible was put together. So, it is not such an easy task, because even the theologians have a lot of unanswered questions.

Apart from anything else, there is the hold field of debates in theology and a lot of questions about how the Bible was put together. So, it is not such an easy task, because even the theologians have a lot of unanswered questions. — Jack Cummins

I would have thought that much was obvious. Believers cherry pick what they want to accept in all religions. My point is you have to start with what the source material says. The matter of interpretation is a separate one.

I even have you, to liven things up. — Ken Edwards

Nice to meet you too!

Some of these have become Buddhists in response to the need for a religion which is free from this fear. — Jack Cummins

Buddhism has an elaborate system of hells, and many forms of traditional Buddhism are more negative towards sexuality than Christianity ever was. It's kind of an urban myth, in my view, that Buddhism doesn't believe in sin or hell.

Hinduism says we are God, so there is no damnation. Such a safeguard is not in Buddhism

Yes, I have some awareness that Buddhism is often seen in a very romanticized way. The idea of rebirth often appeals to many people, although I know that beliefs about rebirth differ. From my understanding, the Buddha was uncertain about rebirth. Of course, he did not write books and most of this is oral tradition, and there are many traditions of Buddhism, just as there are many Christian denominations.

In response to the idea that their religion is purely negative, Buddhist often speak as if annata is denying you have Atman in order to open the Brahmin within. But traditional Buddhism says that experience is real instead of substance. They deny you are Brahmin because Brahmin is not nothing. You are nothing, said the Buddha

nd there are many traditions of Buddhism, just as there are many Christian denominations. — Jack Cummins

Indeed. Say what you want about Buddhism. The opposite is also true.

I believe that you are correct to see the New Testament as blending of many traditions, including the Egyptian and Sumerian. This probably isn't acknowledge enough and I don't believe that all the Old Testament writers saw themselves writing literal accounts. We have Psalms, accounts of exiles, and 'The Book of Job', which is like a drama.

I do think your emphasis on 'blending' is one than can be useful. It is more the language of the artist. It may be that philosophy can make use of blending as a concept for putting ideas together, rather than being just about refuting arguments.