<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt">Spike said:<br><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></b></font> consider that religion professors are<br>extremely sophisticated in their analysis, all based on an assumption which<br>cannot be proven but which must be accepted by faith: that the bible is the<br>revealed word of god (if christian or jew). When pressed, they will freely<br>admit that if this assumption is incorrect, then all the notions built<br>thereupon are mere tales told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying<br>nothing.<br><br>--<br><br>I'd like to just point out the difference between the fields of religious studies and theology: while Spike's
claim would be true of Theology as a discipline, Religious Studies is a non-doctrinaire academic investigation, many of whose professors and scholars are atheist or agnostic (or at the least would reject such a grand claim as that of the bible being "the revealed word of god"...of course many committed christians and jews would also feel the need to add much qualification to this assertion). They simply find religion a fascinating thing to study, and something which says a lot about the human endeavour. And probably they find H+ interesting now for similar reasons, that it expresses much of the same longings for purpose, growth, assured future and longevity common to our species.<br><br>Mike<br></div></div></div><br>
</body></html>