I can understand that. I had no formal religious teaching when I was young and grew up convinced it was all just bad. It was a series of coincidences that made me curious, because the Bible was described in a pamphlet I read as a literary source that contained the wisdom of the people who carried it. I read the Bible as a literary source, entertained the possibility that it could be history but found that to be irrelevant, discovered the depth of Hebrew (via a friend who is a philologist), and recently discovered the symbolism that is contained therein.
I also had deep conversations with Pastors and Priests of various denominations who had a long experience of counselling, especially in the context of my job with dying elderly patients. We agreed that the raw texts themselves are open to a variety of interpretations, some gentle, some aggressive, some thoughtful and some militant. It is the lessons that we derive from them that are important, in particular with Old Testament texts, and how we live as a result of them.
I also found a contemplative reading, as well as finding comparisons helpful, but also understanding mythology better. Of course, it is a dated source, which you have to take into account, and we all know that conserved narratives get old. You only have to read Grimm’s fairy tales to notice that. I also read a feminist book on the role of mothers as storytellers, how our stories shape us for life, but also how stories evolve with communities, if they are to remain pertinent and alive.
In a way, I’m saying that the “narrow-minded” approach to the subject of religion is just that. Iain McGilchrist demonstrates in his books a tendency of people since about 250 years to neglect the “broad-minded” attention of the right hemisphere for the more narrow and focused attention of the left hemisphere. Consequently, we have less time for the broader view, for understanding the depth and complexity of a subject, and more for the question of whether I can utilise (consume, use, eat) it. I’m sure you have heard young people told to focus, pay attention etc. although it wasn’t a case of them not paying attention in broader sense, but only in the narrower sense.
That is why we have difficulties on Discussion Forums, with a lot of narrow-minded people disturbing the exchange of the broader minded, with lots of staccato, clipped, and disjointed comments. Fundamentalism is an example of such narrow-mindedness, which attacks the broad-mindedness of comparative theology or perennialism, psychology and experiential knowledge. It can be hoped that the broader minded can remain disciplined and continue their enquiry.