New Members
Group Management
Sponsored links
Near Believers
This group is created to gather interpretations and opinions from multiple aspects pertaining to the Holy Word, regardless of what Book they spring from. Hopefully, religious professionals as well as layman will take part so a fuller spectrum will be acheived.
Please think hard before you write.
Recent Messages
Milestones in My Intellectual Development Ia
1959-1960—8th Grade—Age 13
8th grade (1959-1960) was a watershed for my intellectual development. I made four discoveries that started me questioning and began my “intellectual career"; three of these discoveries related to my (then) religion. The first discovery occurred during a required course in Biology; the second discovery was made as I spent more time with girls; the third discovery, believe it or not, occurred when I read the Bible; the fourth discovery had to do with a certain type of comic book.
I was raised in the Church of the Nazarene, and was a member until 1966. The Nazarenes resist, and resent, the label “Fundamentalist”, preferring to be called a “Holiness Church”. According to them, “Holiness Churches” are a separate group of denominations that insist that a person needs a “second work of grace”, salvation not being sufficient to get into heaven. Another “Holiness” denomination that was always mentioned was the “Pilgrim Holiness Church”. (I don’t remember what else.) The specific congregation by which I was taught believed in the literal interpretation of inerrant scripture. For example, Genesis Chapter One tells us that God created the heavens and the earth, and all there in, in six days, and rested on the seventh. If this is what the scripture says, then it is true. If God told Moses this, then it must be true. The Nazarenes I grew up with agreed whole-heartedly with Billy Graham’s statement that there was only on author of the Bible, with 86 scribes. In addition the church I grew up in believed that Darwin was in the service of Satan and the evolutionary theory did not even make sense; the only people who thought it made sense were those whose minds were corrupted by Satan.
In Anne Arundel County, Maryland, in 1959, it was illegal to teach evolution. (It was also illegal to teach about the human reproductive system in biological science courses, even in High Schools.) When I took the 8th grade required Biological Science course, what was presented was simply the different phyla, starting with the simplest life forms and moving up to more and more complex life forms. No connections among them were ever mentioned.
(Illustrating how much Biology has changed in the intervening 49 years (from 1959-2008), we were being taught that life-forms fell into two “kingdoms”, plants and animals, with some confusion about the Euglena. The criteria for this classification were that plants had chloroplasts and had no locomotion, while animals had locomotion but no chloroplasts. The problem with the Euglena was that it had both chloroplast and locomotion. Today there are eleven kingdoms covering the same set of life forms.)
When we got to the third phylum of the animal kingdom, which, I think, included sponges, a “light bulb” went off “in my head”. It seemed to me that as we were moving “up” the phyla, not only were we moving to more and more complex organisms, but some of the complexity seemed to be a function of certain structures becoming more specialized in function. If looked at in that way, there seemed to be a progression from simpler to more complex. At that point I thought, “Well I’ll be. Maybe evolution does make sense.” As the course progressed, the development by specialization became clearer and clearer, so that by the end of the academic year, not only did I think that evolution as a theory was not nonsensical, but actually quite plausible.
Once I made the mistake, in a discussion during a Sunday School class, of expressing my belief that evolution was plausible, and that maybe God created the various life forms on earth using the process of evolution. There was absolute silence for a moment, as the class looked at me stunned. Then pandemonium broke loose, with everyone trying to talk at once, offering objections to, and arguments against, evolution. The two main arguments presented were (1) an argument from authority and (2) a “slippery slope” argument. The first argument, the argument from authority, was the now familiar argument from Scripture. If evolution is true, then God didn’t create all life-forms in six days, which means the Bible lies. But the Bible is the inspired word of God; Thus if the Bible lies, the God lies. The second, slippery slope, argument went like the following. Human beings have souls. To say that humans were created from monkey suggests the possibility that monkeys have souls. But if monkeys have souls, then it is likely that what ever animal monkeys came from have souls. If we push this line of argument, are you willing to say amoebas have souls? Do amoebas need to be saved? Do monkeys need to be saved? Where do we stop and say “from here on, there are souls, but from here back, there are not?” A third, minor argument was more of a trick question: “Genesis tells us that God created humans in His own image; are you saying that God looks like a monkey?” Of course, being only 13, I had no answer for these questions; I felt sorry that I had opened my mouth, and deeply shamed.
Word of my comment must have traveled like wildfire. That afternoon, Rev. Albright, our pastor, Ken Kresswell, the Sunday School superintendent, Leon McClymont, a member of the church board, together came to talk to my parents. After their discussion, I was called into the room, and it was explained to me how pernicious the theory of evolution is for those whose faith is weak, and everyone got down on their knees to pray that my faith would be strengthened and that I would also be given the strength in the future to resist the temptation of intellectual pride, thinking that I knew better than my elders.
For the next four years I pretty much kept my mouth shut on matters of “doctrine”, but I did not stop thinking. I got a couple books out of the library, and in the 10th grade purchased a book by A. I. Oparin entitled The Origin of Life. In my junior year I took a course in Zoology, which cemented my fate as an evolutionist.
The Oparin book was the stimulus for another lesson learned. Oparin discusses the origin of our solar system as being caused by a very large comet coming close enough to our sun that its gravitational field pulled gaseous material from the sun, which then cooled and broke apart to form the planets. In his discussion of the make-up of the sun, and hence the make up of the material that formed the planets, he lists C2. I showed it to my chemistry teacher, who said that there was no such thing as C2. Because of this, I put the book aside, disappointed. In was not until my Freshman Chemistry course in college that I learned that C2 is the gaseous form of carbon, and in the sun, carbon would be in gaseous form!! So much for relying on the authority of one’s teachers.
8th grade (1959-1960) was a watershed for my intellectual development. I made four discoveries that started me questioning and began my “intellectual career"; three of these discoveries related to my (then) religion. The first discovery occurred during a required course in Biology; the second discovery was made as I spent more time with girls; the third discovery, believe it or not, occurred when I read the Bible; the fourth discovery had to do with a certain type of comic book.
I was raised in the Church of the Nazarene, and was a member until 1966. The Nazarenes resist, and resent, the label “Fundamentalist”, preferring to be called a “Holiness Church”. According to them, “Holiness Churches” are a separate group of denominations that insist that a person needs a “second work of grace”, salvation not being sufficient to get into heaven. Another “Holiness” denomination that was always mentioned was the “Pilgrim Holiness Church”. (I don’t remember what else.) The specific congregation by which I was taught believed in the literal interpretation of inerrant scripture. For example, Genesis Chapter One tells us that God created the heavens and the earth, and all there in, in six days, and rested on the seventh. If this is what the scripture says, then it is true. If God told Moses this, then it must be true. The Nazarenes I grew up with agreed whole-heartedly with Billy Graham’s statement that there was only on author of the Bible, with 86 scribes. In addition the church I grew up in believed that Darwin was in the service of Satan and the evolutionary theory did not even make sense; the only people who thought it made sense were those whose minds were corrupted by Satan.
In Anne Arundel County, Maryland, in 1959, it was illegal to teach evolution. (It was also illegal to teach about the human reproductive system in biological science courses, even in High Schools.) When I took the 8th grade required Biological Science course, what was presented was simply the different phyla, starting with the simplest life forms and moving up to more and more complex life forms. No connections among them were ever mentioned.
(Illustrating how much Biology has changed in the intervening 49 years (from 1959-2008), we were being taught that life-forms fell into two “kingdoms”, plants and animals, with some confusion about the Euglena. The criteria for this classification were that plants had chloroplasts and had no locomotion, while animals had locomotion but no chloroplasts. The problem with the Euglena was that it had both chloroplast and locomotion. Today there are eleven kingdoms covering the same set of life forms.)
When we got to the third phylum of the animal kingdom, which, I think, included sponges, a “light bulb” went off “in my head”. It seemed to me that as we were moving “up” the phyla, not only were we moving to more and more complex organisms, but some of the complexity seemed to be a function of certain structures becoming more specialized in function. If looked at in that way, there seemed to be a progression from simpler to more complex. At that point I thought, “Well I’ll be. Maybe evolution does make sense.” As the course progressed, the development by specialization became clearer and clearer, so that by the end of the academic year, not only did I think that evolution as a theory was not nonsensical, but actually quite plausible.
Once I made the mistake, in a discussion during a Sunday School class, of expressing my belief that evolution was plausible, and that maybe God created the various life forms on earth using the process of evolution. There was absolute silence for a moment, as the class looked at me stunned. Then pandemonium broke loose, with everyone trying to talk at once, offering objections to, and arguments against, evolution. The two main arguments presented were (1) an argument from authority and (2) a “slippery slope” argument. The first argument, the argument from authority, was the now familiar argument from Scripture. If evolution is true, then God didn’t create all life-forms in six days, which means the Bible lies. But the Bible is the inspired word of God; Thus if the Bible lies, the God lies. The second, slippery slope, argument went like the following. Human beings have souls. To say that humans were created from monkey suggests the possibility that monkeys have souls. But if monkeys have souls, then it is likely that what ever animal monkeys came from have souls. If we push this line of argument, are you willing to say amoebas have souls? Do amoebas need to be saved? Do monkeys need to be saved? Where do we stop and say “from here on, there are souls, but from here back, there are not?” A third, minor argument was more of a trick question: “Genesis tells us that God created humans in His own image; are you saying that God looks like a monkey?” Of course, being only 13, I had no answer for these questions; I felt sorry that I had opened my mouth, and deeply shamed.
Word of my comment must have traveled like wildfire. That afternoon, Rev. Albright, our pastor, Ken Kresswell, the Sunday School superintendent, Leon McClymont, a member of the church board, together came to talk to my parents. After their discussion, I was called into the room, and it was explained to me how pernicious the theory of evolution is for those whose faith is weak, and everyone got down on their knees to pray that my faith would be strengthened and that I would also be given the strength in the future to resist the temptation of intellectual pride, thinking that I knew better than my elders.
For the next four years I pretty much kept my mouth shut on matters of “doctrine”, but I did not stop thinking. I got a couple books out of the library, and in the 10th grade purchased a book by A. I. Oparin entitled The Origin of Life. In my junior year I took a course in Zoology, which cemented my fate as an evolutionist.
The Oparin book was the stimulus for another lesson learned. Oparin discusses the origin of our solar system as being caused by a very large comet coming close enough to our sun that its gravitational field pulled gaseous material from the sun, which then cooled and broke apart to form the planets. In his discussion of the make-up of the sun, and hence the make up of the material that formed the planets, he lists C2. I showed it to my chemistry teacher, who said that there was no such thing as C2. Because of this, I put the book aside, disappointed. In was not until my Freshman Chemistry course in college that I learned that C2 is the gaseous form of carbon, and in the sun, carbon would be in gaseous form!! So much for relying on the authority of one’s teachers.
Time to think
Here I am 3:42 am cruising EONS, pain from a healing surgery on my foot has me awake and here I find the perfect place for me "Near Believers".
I have often thought of myself as eclectic if Divine thought, I believe that there are treasures of truth scattered about and found just about everywhere like change dropped in the parking lots of malls or stores. We usually don't notice them then right in front of us is a quarter someone has dropped and over looked. Well I think truths come in the same fashion.
I look forward to feeling at home here.
Ruth Baker
I have often thought of myself as eclectic if Divine thought, I believe that there are treasures of truth scattered about and found just about everywhere like change dropped in the parking lots of malls or stores. We usually don't notice them then right in front of us is a quarter someone has dropped and over looked. Well I think truths come in the same fashion.
I look forward to feeling at home here.
Ruth Baker
Hello and Thanks for being here!
I was crusing around and here you are. I'm a Grace believer and at one time I sat in churches and listened to pastors. I tried to take them at their word since they said it came from God's word. I found that if you truly want to know the truth you must study God's word on your own.
The Well Formed Mind
In too many churches, a questing mind can be a plague to its owner. The thinking man or woman seldom gets much support today and more often than not meets with resistance or suspicion. And so, the Christian who must use his or her mind because they are driven by the pure joy of using it, can find themselves in an odd, ambivalent relationship in the church. Why have we lost or neglected he ability to disciple the MIND for Christ?
Have you ever experiened a miracle?
Some say miracles exist, others call it magic, and some just downright don't believe anything happens outside common everyday experience. Is there anyone who has experienced something they would qualify as a legitimate miracle?
Conscience/ethics/morality
Under the previous thread of The Well Formed Mind Kerry wrote: "Then we could teach morality without guilt. Hope without fear. And all the desirable attributes for their own sake, instead of for reward or punishment. Your judge would be your conscience..."
What constitute conscience? How is it formed? Who decides the "desirable attributes"? Where and how are they learned?
Has anyone read "Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor E. Frankl?
He wrote that contrary to other popular psychology - frued, eg; human's desire is for meaning and purpose. His experiences as a survivor of Auschwitz informed his pychology.
"Our generation is realistic, for we have come to know man as he really is," Frankl writes. "After all, man is that being who invented the gas chambers of Auschwitz; however, he is also that being who entered those gas chambers upright, with the Lord's Prayer or the Shema Yisrael on his lips."
We are conflicted in our actions and our diverse cultural learning. What gives us the best hope of maintaining diversity and living in peace or finding those universally understood "desireable attributes"?
I will hunt my bookshelves, but in "Belief or Nonbelief?" by Umberto Eco and Cardinal Martini, Eco gives an answer to how one can believe in moral absolutes without believing in God.
What constitute conscience? How is it formed? Who decides the "desirable attributes"? Where and how are they learned?
Has anyone read "Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor E. Frankl?
He wrote that contrary to other popular psychology - frued, eg; human's desire is for meaning and purpose. His experiences as a survivor of Auschwitz informed his pychology.
"Our generation is realistic, for we have come to know man as he really is," Frankl writes. "After all, man is that being who invented the gas chambers of Auschwitz; however, he is also that being who entered those gas chambers upright, with the Lord's Prayer or the Shema Yisrael on his lips."
We are conflicted in our actions and our diverse cultural learning. What gives us the best hope of maintaining diversity and living in peace or finding those universally understood "desireable attributes"?
I will hunt my bookshelves, but in "Belief or Nonbelief?" by Umberto Eco and Cardinal Martini, Eco gives an answer to how one can believe in moral absolutes without believing in God.
Carl Sagan's View
Carl sagan talks about the need for religion, and some deep thinking on its origins.
view link
view link
It's awfully quiet
Have we used up all our ideas? I was learning a buncha stuff, especially from dara and PJ.
I am an agnostic, so I will listen to both sides. The existence of God is definitely one of the possibilities.
I am an agnostic, so I will listen to both sides. The existence of God is definitely one of the possibilities.
Funny thoughtful stuff
So funny ! -
Have you seen - "Mr. Diety" on You Tube by misterdiety. (brian keith dalton) I think there are maybe 10 short episodes
view link
See also - I'm a Christ Follower (Mac v PC Parody) by bramsvan
I think there are like six in the series now.
view link
Have you seen - "Mr. Diety" on You Tube by misterdiety. (brian keith dalton) I think there are maybe 10 short episodes
view link
See also - I'm a Christ Follower (Mac v PC Parody) by bramsvan
I think there are like six in the series now.
view link
Religion and Human Nature
I go to church and keep quiet. I have spent my whole life trying to believe as others claim to do. At about age 6, you learn that Santa Claus was made up for kids. I have been waiting for someone to finally say that religion is a Santa Claus story for adults. It seems to me that most people were so indoctrinated as children that they are AFRAID to question religion, or try to think it through.
If you consider Moses situation when he wrote Genesis, it makes sense from a human nature viewpoint. He was the leader of a nation that was running amok. He knew that fear and guilt was one way to control them. So he took Abraham's one-all-powerful -god idea, added the ancient Hebrew history, spun up some creation theory, and started writing. It was a work of genius, for his day and age. It has been embellished with prophecies, miracles and mystery through the ages. It works very well to help the lower classes to tolerate their stressful life, while waiting for the great reward in the hereafter. And so, I keep quiet. They need their religion, especially in times of strife and grief. It serves as a sedative, a community function, a way of teaching morality to children. Am I the only one who sees it this way?
If you consider Moses situation when he wrote Genesis, it makes sense from a human nature viewpoint. He was the leader of a nation that was running amok. He knew that fear and guilt was one way to control them. So he took Abraham's one-all-powerful -god idea, added the ancient Hebrew history, spun up some creation theory, and started writing. It was a work of genius, for his day and age. It has been embellished with prophecies, miracles and mystery through the ages. It works very well to help the lower classes to tolerate their stressful life, while waiting for the great reward in the hereafter. And so, I keep quiet. They need their religion, especially in times of strife and grief. It serves as a sedative, a community function, a way of teaching morality to children. Am I the only one who sees it this way?
Photos
To add photos, you have to join this group (requires you to log in first or sign up for Eons.)
