Mick, it isn't the intelligence of the discussors that is the problem, it's the breadth of the subject and the brevity of contact possible online. I certainly don't mean to be dismissive. But I would suggest that people honestly interested would need a great deal more information (and more processing time) than the present discussion appears to reflect. Both are possible without going to seminary, but a little homework would be in order.

Perhaps this is due to my Anglican world view in matters of faith, where we count on the balance between Scripture, Tradition, and Reason to guide our inquiry. We tend not to rush, and like to be in conversation with plenty of room to wonder and explore. Compared to that style of theological exploration, this discussion seems to me to be more like a mutual airing of entrenched positions. In a discussion such as we hold in our seminar, there'd be less attempt at persuasion and more willingness to not arrive at answers, than I see going on here.

That's fine if that's what people want to do, of course-- but it's not the actually same as learning about Theology, and I think if people want to know about it, there are sources well beyond Mudcat wisdom that might be considered.

A parallel of sorts exists in a current thread about the blues-- Mudcatter Azizi wants to catch up on blues culture she's missed. It won't happen overnight; and as one post described, it can't be done without actually experiencing some of it. The nature and the breadth of the subject are such that at a certain point, one has to jump in or one has not touched the subject at hand.

~Susan