Posted: Jul 15, 2017 3:11 pm
by proudfootz
RealityRules wrote:.
Christian Mythology – I Beg to Differ with C.S. Lewis

The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact.” – C.S. Lewis

Introduction

The purpose of this essay is to provide the reader with a cursory understanding of not only what constitutes myth proper, but of how the narratives which form the basis of the Christian religion fit into this category we call myth...

https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress ... c-s-lewis/

.


I am rather taken with the discussion of how the myth is 'remote' from its audience. While I do appreciate the aspect of how 'remote in time' can be very different for an illiterate audience as opposed to what 'remote in time' means to us who have books, magazines, photographs, films, audio which brings the world of half a century ago into a sense of immediacy for us.

I am also glad to see how there is also a sense of 'remote in location' which is another aspect discussed here. IMO much of the literature appears to be aimed at an audience not only a generation or two removed in time, but also remote in language, culture, and place.

But it also makes me think there may be a further sense of 'remote in location' because of the stories are about a turning point in history: the world before the messiah is changed to the world after the messiah; the 'old covenant' is replaced with a 'new covenant'; a new 'tribe of christians' supplants the old 'tribes of Israel'; and so on. The stories are set in a world remote in the sense that the rules that applied then are no longer applicable to the contemporary world (even if 'contemporary' only means 2nd century). This is a lot like the 'Golden Age' myths or in christian terms the 'Age of Miracles'.

The bit about the 'intellectual remoteness' was also an interesting observation:

But what if, as a storyteller, you localized your fiction? You could subtract the dreamlike state of a remote and fantastic ancient earth and replace it with a more recent yet localized supernatural event, one which could not be easily observed. You could set the tale as far back in time as necessary to separate the audience from the time of the tale’s alleged occurrence. You could say that the miracles occurred around one little obscure man, a “blip on the screen,” in an equally small and obscure location. This way your tale would be relatively safe from immediate dismissal and refutation. Finally, you could initially relay it to the meek, unlearned and illiterate masses, people prone, through no fault of their own, to credulity – whose hopes could be easily fanned by flagrant fantasies – those who would not know that Quirinius could not have been governor of Syria at the same time as Herod the Great’s rule. You could sell your tale, not only upon the grounds of remoteness as it applies to both the location and the obscurity of a single insignificant figure, but also, upon the basis of the intellectual remoteness of your audience. This is precisely how I see the element of remoteness as it applied to the development and propagation of the Christian myths.


Thanks for the link to this essay!