Of course the two Butler books address these issues - they are precisely why I am interested in them. And I recognize that Christianity is part of the discussion. Religion fascinates me, and I write about it in my own fiction, although I suspect you might find my ideas as “dangerous” and “repetitious” as you find Butler’s, even though my ideas are very different than hers. I am interested in following many different ideas about religion, however, not Christianity only (in its many diverse forms), but also Buddhism, Hinduism, the Jewish faith, Taoism, Wicce, etc.
In your opinion. I disagree. I think it offers some interesting alternatives and ones that I believe are worth discussing, even if we ultimately decide they are incomplete.
These are clearly sources that matter to you, but I do not agree with them. I give no “higher authority” to the Bible over other texts. We may agree to disagree in these matters, but I take issue to any “unequivocal” arguments “this is this and that is that”. Argument is all about difference and uncertainty, and truth as an absolute is itself as dangerous a commodity as your “error of Balaam”… in my opinion. You are entitled to your opinions, but your statements are precisely that, opinions, not fact as the language they are couched in suggests. If we agree on that, we have no issues.
Perhaps it is only a question of semantics, Katina. It wouldn’t be the first time that I have gotten upset over semantics - on this site, even. I think I need to shut up, I really don’t want to make a big fuss about this, I just needed to say it was all.