[Tirned Tinnu]

Well met, Bill Ferny.
There are just three points I do have to make about religion and myth. We all take the written word as fact, do we not? Certainly you must agree that The Bible is a group of stories written by many men and told from differing points of view. To understand it as a whole, one must take into account that there will be discrepancies. Seeing how we tear into Tolkien's works parallels the way we compare the Apostle's views in The Bible.

I will not argue here the validity of such works, handed down by mouth and translated umpteen times for a voratious public. Each group has their own opinions on what is fact and what is fantasy. You make the statement
"I am just blindly backing up Christianity".
That is exactly what I fear. Blindness is a sort of disease, it leads people unaware into alleys and drags them to a spot where they cannot see other views and blindly declares that Gnosis and other forms of Chrisitanity are "Pagan".

We would do well to understand what the word "Pagan" really means. The actual translation of the word is "rural", referring to those that live in the country, and practice religions alien to city-living.

I find the term rather awkward. In today's society it is the Victorian (as Dr. Hoeller mentioned to my joy) attitiude of closedmindedness that pervades our religion. Anything different is thus chaulked up to being "Pagan" or - "devil worship!" Oh, yes, I eat babies everyday for breakfast. Hmph!
Tolerance is something that has to be learned. Using the word "Pagan" only enforces the belief that anything other than what you believe is evil.

Now getting to Mythology, would you not say that Myths themselves are "Pagan"? look at the miriad of myths Tolkien used. Finnish Gods and Goddesses, Roman ideals, Norse Gods...all renamed and retold so that they are "harmless" to the general public. He was in fact, making them accessable to those who might otherwise have labeled LOTR and The Silm "dangerous!"

I find it strange and rather foolish that people believe that by reading Lewis and Tolkien that they are "safe" from "harm".
That was not the intention of their works. Rather, they had an open-minded view of religion that allows for a comparision and a union between other religions and Christianity. Learning about the origins of your religion is not a "bad" thing. It merely allows one to be more tolerant of others.

I do not ascribe to the belief that Tolkien had much to do with Christianity in his works. That the Silm is much like The Bible does not seem likely in the light of having read The Kabbalah, Irish myth such as The Toyne, Persian Poetry and Finnish sagas.
It is a mish-mash of religions and myths.

I recognise your interest, Ferny, in "warning" people not to listen to Dr. Hoeller's and Joseph Campbell's works. However! I do have the urge to make known that your point of view will make sure that many will ignore and become more ignorant of their own religious backrounds. (Just what the Mother Church wanted from the beginning, more paritioners to keep her fantastic machine of money and power running.)
I find that sad." Myths are to be shared in innocence and wonder, not to be dashed against the walls of Christianity as Paganism.