I don't know what it is about religion that lets any dumbass think he gets to comment on it. The only people who have any business claiming to speak authoritatively about the Bible are Biblical scholars and scholars of ancient history, i.e., people who can actually read the text in the languages in which it was written and know something about the societies from which it emerged. Other people should just shut up.
............
Speaking of religious themes...
My god! I must have died and landed in some quadrant of hell where electronically mediated discussions loop back around themselves -- yes, like an Ouroboros -- repeating forever.
We had almost precisely this discussion before.
Then as now, someone's religion pissing book is released inspiring supportive and negative comment. Then as now, the discussion divides into two camps: people who think the book non-erotically spanks all the right asses and the opposing camp, who think we should be nicer to believers (after all, Bishop Such and Much, Rabbi Look Out and Rev. How's Yer Father came out against this or that, which we like, etc).
But most hilariously of all Mr. Doss weighs in from a Cossack-themed Internet cafe, authoritatively telling us what Christianity is and what it isn't, what's an "aberration" and what's canon.
There are...thematic similarities to the way the Hegel discussions have historically unfolded. Traditionally, those are shutdown (or at least, shutdown attempts are made) by an appeal to expertise. A regrettable donkey comparison was once deployed as a rhetorical taser, with predictably disruptive results.
Now, when it comes to discussions of complex philosophical systems, theoretical physics or plumbing (among other topics), I have no problem swiveling my Dr. No swivel chair towards the person with the greater experience and info-store.
But as Doug and Dennis Claxton have pointed out, Christianity is a living thing, constantly in flux, birthing new sects and interpretations at a dizzying rate. Which means that, just as Doug posted, it's really very silly to insist upon an appeal to authority. I grew up Baptist before switching to SDA at around 11, moved by a fear that my certainly-not-evil but still, fundamentally flawed inherited church -- which failed to recognize the 'true' sabbath -- was gently walking me down the road to, if not Hell precisely, some sub-optimal spiritual fate (therefore, the need, for yet another Christian group, to close the scriptural interpretation gap).
Reflective people who grew up Christian -- of whatever denomination -- intimately understand how these things work and seldom share Chris' really very odd, and almost wholly academic view of ever-in-motion Christian doctrine.
One of the best ways to visualize the relationship of Christian academics -- official canon, doctrine or what have you -- to on-the-ground belief, practice and theory building is to consider Star Wars fandom.
Only with a much longer timeline.
Everyday, on every continent of this fun-loving planet, someone is arguing with someone else about what's SW canon and what's an "aberration". The usually unstated punchline is that since the entire thing is fantasy, there is an awful lot of room for mucking about with the story and its ideas. That is, intricate explanations of god's will and intention are no more solid than a detailed analysis of commerce during the time of the First Galactic Republic.
This doesn't mean that interesting philosophical and psychological insights can't emerge from serious religious thought and the scholarship which accrues. But telling people to shut up and read Aquinas (or sit at the feet of the experts who've mastered the master's ideas) doesn't compute. No appeal to scholarship will -- or should -- stop a corner Protestant preacher from announcing that he or she received a revelation via a dream which will form the basis of a new sect.
Because really, the ability to read the original Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic gives a scholar the ability to interpret what the ancients thought. It does not bestow a veto over all current and future interpretations of a faith which long ago expanded beyond the confines of original writ.
Also....
Why are we discussing religion, again!
I must be in...
Hell! Where you'll step on naught but hot coals and drink naught but hot cola!
.d.