I certainly have.Okay sir, that's your conclusion. But have you ever read or studied any of it in depth **without** making 'a priori' assumptions that it's myth?
*a posteriori* conclusions are subservient to the data; data is not subservient to conclusions. The conclusion is reached after the data or facts have been observed. Only data or fact that can be verified are utilized in the conclusion.
*a priori* conclusions are subservient to the conclusion; data is subservient to the conclusion. The conclusion is made, then the data or facts are observed. The facts or data are rejected or accepted based on the conclusion.
Christian Theology and apologetic begins with *a priori* conclusions and rarely employs *a posteriori* methodology.
I've noticed that when theologians apply a posteriori methodology to their endeavors, they quite often become agnostic or atheist.
There are numerous branches, and some are more concerned with arriving at fact and evidence based conclusions - than others.Do you know how many different types of theology there are?
That applies to the various disciplines and to individuals.
There's a reason for that. Maybe I should supply the definition for myth.If you want to label it all as 'mythology' I certainly can't stop you.
1. A traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. A traditional story accepted as history; serves to explain the world view of a people.
WordWeb Pro 7.02
That's why your religious belief is called myth.
However, if you're willing to open your mind to new understandings, it's not a bad idea to crack open one of these heavy volumes and be surprised by what you DIDN'T know.
Comments like that equate to:
"If you only believed what I believe, then you'd believe as I do"