 Martin created his mythology during, as a response, I guess, to what Nietzsche called the death of God, which was the God of the Torah. Now Leon, for you being a religious you, I know you're religious you, what is the difference, what is the difference between a world in which your God of the Torah is still present and this Wagnerian world with the gods of the Abba? Well, in terms of, there's a lot to be said about this, the first thing I'd say is that in terms of the sublimity of the God concept, I mean I'm one of those people who believes that whatever the word God means, it has to mean something sublime and we can discuss what that means too, but compared to the Eda, well I mean compared to the to the highest expression of the concept of God in the monotheistic traditions, the Eda are fairy tales and they are, they may be of narrative interest, literary interest, human interest, psychological interest, but they are of no metaphysical or philosophical interest, at least to me. I think that there are two ways to think about the death of God, the death of God, when people speak that way they're either speaking about culture or about philosophy. It's true, you know, that there came a point in Western culture when faith began to wane and if you want to call the decline of faith the death of God, it's kind of a melodramatic and somewhat narcissistic way to put it, but fine. You know, when I first read that famous sentence in the gay science of Nietzsche's about the death of God, I thought to myself, well you lost your faith so God dies. I mean that seems awfully narcissistic to me, but culturally there's no question that secularization was one of the fundamental forces that created the modern world and that people began to lose faith not just in God but in the metaphysical dimension more generally, more generally and that's still, to my mind, a huge problem. Then there is the question of the death of God philosophically and that really is a question of what is true or false about the universe. You know, the difference between the ancient and medieval view on the one hand and the modern view of religion on the other hand was that in the old view, religion was before it was anything else a series of propositions about the universe that were either true or false. There is a God, there is no God, there is providence, there is chance, the world was created, matter is eternal, they can't all be right and that's why science was very involved in this kind of religion. The modern view of religion is that religion is not about objective truth so much as about what we call subjective truth and it's about interstates, ecstasy and fear and trembling and dread and sickness unto death and bliss and etc etc. But one of the things, if one takes religion seriously, one of the first things one realizes is that the intensity of a belief and the popularity of a belief have nothing whatsoever to do with the truth of a belief. Nothing, nothing. So for example, I recognize that people have martyred themselves to causes and given down their life that they believed in it so intensely that they gave their life but I happen to think that what they gave their life for is nonsense. That doesn't mean I don't respect them because they may, there's a great spiritual achievement in that. But philosophically speaking, the idea that God dies is completely incoherent. You know, when we were in high school we were given Elie Wiesel's night to read and in night there is the famous sentence in which he says, I forget the words, that God died at Auschwitz and I remember thinking even then, wait a second, if there is a God then God didn't die at Auschwitz, he wasn't born, he doesn't die. And the only way for me to read that sentence and maybe the only way for me to read Nietzsche's sentence is not as an expression of philosophy but as an expression of feeling, which is to say that they experienced such loneliness and desolation in the universe that the world became so cold and so unbearable that the only way they could formulate this feeling was to say that God is dead. So I think, I'll stop here, but I think that generally you have to distinguish between the cultural phenomenon of the loss of faith and the actual question of what we have justified grounds in believing. They're not the same question, even if you can prove to anyone's satisfaction that God does exist that still may have no impact whatsoever on the progress of secularization in culture and the loss of interest in metaphysics and so on. So I think that's the distinction you have to make.