Archives for posts with tag: Christian Churches

The Gad Fly ver. 1.2.1

The Philosopher

http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

7/20/2016

Copyright 2016

Definition of Gad Fly

  • A fly that bites livestock, especially a horsefly, warble fly, or botfly.
  • An annoying person, especially one who provokes others into action by criticism.

The Gad Fly of the Greek Democracy[i]

  • Plato refers to Socrates as the “gad fly” of the state (as the gad fly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung various Athenians).

The Gad Fly of the Christian Church[ii]

A New Paradigm in Christian Thinkingis the gad fly of the Christian Church.  Christian Churches do not accept criticism, ever. The price of criticism in the Christian Church is excommunication.  Christian sees themselves as “birds of a feather” and a critical bird is not of their nest.  They must protect the income and salaries of the professional Christians, the minds of their youth and the minds of all of their members from the gad flies of the Christian Church. Professional Christians must preach to the choir, instructing them on the religion that they have chosen to put their faith.  The cost of not preaching to the choir is that the choir will vote with their feet and donations, resulting in a loss of income to the church and the professional Christians who probably have children – if Protestant – that they need to get through college and a mortgage to pay off.   If the professional Christians are Catholic, they will not meet with the approval of the hierarchy of the church and will be excommunicated.

Max Planck, the German nuclear physicist of the early twentieth century, stated, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.[iii]

The same statement can be made of religion.  Acceptance of a new viewpoint of the existing data on religion can only take place when a younger generation becomes comfortable with these new views and those who are adamantly opposed to these new views die off.

Because of this self-protection of the minds of the youths, the church is destined to disappear for failure to keep up with our knowledge of the universe and the light it has shined on our knowledge and purpose of the visit to planet Earth of the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU) two thousand years ago, and taught how the Homo sapiens who have evolved over the past thousands of centuries can get their basic needs of food, clothing and shelter met on this planet Earth and how to live in peace with each other and other nations.

An interesting side note is that Paleoanthropologist has found no link to the evolution of the Homo sapien skull to that of the evolved Ancient Man, leaving open the creation of the Homo species by the “Creator of the Universe”.  Although ancient man and modern man have identical bone structure from the neck on down, their skulls and thus brains are much different, nor is there any evidence of a transitional development from the skull of Ancient Man to the skull (Brain) of the Homo Species. [iv]

The advances in our knowledge of the universe and the life creation process in the last one hundred years, mainly due to the Hubble Telescope and advances in life science, have put the Christian Church in a position where they need to update their theology from religious to pragmatic (cause and effect, science) or face extinction.  The church is clearly in a positon of “grow or die” and the church cannot possibly grow with the determination to maintain their existing course, a course established and handed down through the generations and centuries by people that did not understand the meaning, instructions from the RoCoU and implications of the events that had taken place in the very beginning of “The Way” or the Christian Church.  These events took place in a very religious society and that society, for the most part, saw and recorded these events through a religious lens (perspective).

Case Study I

The RoCoU that visited planet Earth two thousand years ago taught the audience that had gathered around Him how to get along with other people on a one-on-one basis and how nations could live in peace with one another on a nation-to-nation basis.[v]

  • For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” [vi] From the accepted Christian perspective, their judgments will be judged by a higher power at the end of the life of planet Earth. They do not see their judging others as something that has immediate consequences.  From the pragmatic perspective, the effect of judging others – be it one-on-one or nation-to-nation – will have immediate consequences.  All Homo sapiens on planet Earth are of equal authority; one does not have dominion over another. And as one Homo sapien judges another, so in turn are they judged by those they are judging in real time by the same measure they are using to judge!

    This holds true for one nation to judge another nation. As one nation judges another, so is that nation judged, by the measure they use to judge, by the nation they are judging.  As in the case where the USA is judging ISIS with “air strikes,” the USA is being judged by ISIS attacking soft target (civilian targets, airplanes, restaurants, public places, etc.) with bombing and assault weapons.  The USA has judged ISIS as “barbaric” and ISIS, in turn, has judged the USA as “barbaric”.  This ISIS War has made it impossible to tell the Barbarians from the Barbarians.

Wars of our past have been mislabeled.  We must remember that the President of the USA is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the USA.  The orders given by the President must be followed by the USA military forces.  The President does not issue illegal orders.  If the President  orders it, it is a legal order and must be obeyed by those in subornation to the Commander-in-Chief.  One can argue that they do not have to follow an illegal order, but they will probably be sent to the brig while the Supreme Court reviews their case. They will be removed from and replaced from duty and someone else will carry out the Commander-in-Chief’s order.

Therefore the Civil War as we know it was not our civil war – it was  Lincoln’s War.  The USA involvement in WWII was FDR’s and Truman’s War.  Harry Truman was President when the Korean War began in 1950, and Dwight Eisenhower was elected in 1952 and was President when the armistice was signed in 1953.  The Vietnam War was JFK’s initiative and LBJ’s Bombing War; Nixon pulled USA troops out of Vietnam. The Serbia vs. Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO was Clinton’s war.  The Persian Gulf War I with Iraq was G.H.W. Bush’s War.  The Iraq War was G.W. Bush’s War and the ISIS-ISIL War is Obama’s War.

As a professional troubleshooter for over forty years, I can equivalently state that, “A problem must be accurately described before action is taken to try and solve the problem; if not, a bigger problem will be the result.”  By placing the proper labels on our past wars, we should gain some insight as to the right problem to solve.

The Right Problem to Solve

  • Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.” [vii]

The term “workable compromise” was not coined until the twentieth century. Is it any wonder that our ancestors did not understand the meaning of the above instruction from the RoCoU during his visit to planet Earth two thousand years ago?  A workable Compromise is a solution to conflicts that work for all participants in the disagreement.  The first step in search of a workable compromise is to ask the conflicting subject, “What do you want?”  If one does not understand what the conflicting parties want, how can a resolution ever be found that works for the principle parties?

  • Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace.[viii]

Here we have the workable compromise on a much larger scale.  In the case of USA vs. ISIS, the question was never asked, “What do you want?”  If we trace back the steps of the previous administrations, we should be able to predict what ISIS-ISIL wants.  The Sunni Muslims were in power in Iraq prior to G.W. Bush’s administration.  G.W. Bush’s War left the Sunni dispossessed from their homeland by the puppet Shiite Muslim administration installed by Bush. Iraq’s neighbor, Syria, was involved in its own civil war; The Sunni Muslims, now still armed with their weapons from the now defunct Iraq Red Army, seized the opportunity and developed their base of operation in Syria.  This new ISIL then made pronouncement on video, in a very barbaric way, for the USA to “Stay out of our fight.”  The Obama administration judged ISIL as “terrorists” and initiated air strikes against ISIS-ISIL as they threatened our allies in power in Iraq.

As described above in Case Study I, judging a nation as terrorist will result in the judging nation to be judged as terrorist by the judged nation.   As the USA conducted air strikes against “hard targets” (military targets) in an attempt to minimize collateral damage (civilian deaths), ISIS-ISIL, in retaliation, began bombing and assaulting soft targets (Civilian Targets).

Judging and the lack of ability to negotiate a workable compromise by the Obama administration has, and will continue to, cost the western civilization much cost in damage, dislocation of refugees and lives of civilians.  It is apparent that even a routine change in the administration by a newly elected administration will not end this conflict with ISIS-ISIL. A resignation or impeachment of the Chief Executive seems the proper road to pursue.  A newly elected administration would be in a position of trying to apologize for the actions of the previous administrations, and that never happens.

The Lens Used for the Viewing of the Facts

The lens one views the facts, events or evidence through determines the conclusions that the viewer will hold as the correct interpretation of the facts, events or evidence. The classic scenario is this: Two men who are walking in the woods come upon an immaculate garden, complete with trimmed hedges, flower garden arrangements, etc.   One man states, “There must be a caretaker for this place.” The other man states, “What a wonderful work of nature.”   The events that took place during the visit of the RoCoU two thousand years ago can be looked at through a religious lens or a pragmatic lens.

There are two and maybe three writers that were able to record the events, of the visit to Earth by the RoCoU and the events that took place, without looking though there religious lens.  Mark, who wrote the book of Mark in the Book of Books, the Bible, was a young man on the perimeter of the core group who became the Apostles of the RoCoU. He found himself in Rome where much persecution was taking place of the “Christians” in Rome.  He took it upon himself to record for the purpose of history the events that had taken place during his life.  He was an eyewitness to some of the events and received reports from those who were part of the core group of the RoCoU.  The style of writing for an historian is to answer the questions, “who, what, where and when.”   Luke, who wrote the books of Luke (Luke I) and Acts of the Apostles (Luke II), was contracted to record the events that had and were taking place in this time period. [ix]  Luke wrote under the guidelines of a journalist, answering “who, what, where and when.”  Luke was an eyewitness to many of the events that took place, he interviewed others who were eyewitnesses of events and he was an embedded journalist with the Apostle Paul on his missionary journeys.  Matthew was a tax collector and a Jew who made an argument to Jews of the authentication of the RoCoU to the Jewish religion.  He sometimes included the “why” in his writings, as did John in the book of John.  This would make their writing styles, “who, what, where, when and why” a little more difficult to sort out the facts from their interpretation of the facts and events that took place during this visit of the RoCoU.  The Apostle Paul was highly educated in Jewish religion and history.  He viewed our relationship with the RoCoU through the lens of Jewish religion and history.  A close examination of the writing of Paul will disclose that his view of the RoCoU’s visit to planet Earth was religious and the RoCoU’s view of his visit to earth was pragmatic and the next step in the evolution of the Homo species on planet Earth.

The Gad Fly of the Democracy of the USA

The present day gad fly of democracy in the USA is The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired.[x]  The Greeks invented democracy from scratch and it worked well for them for about 170 years.  The Greeks were on the peak of their Golden Age when they got tired of hearing their gad fly, Socrates, who was a critic of their society, in particular of the shortcomings and corruption in this democracy.  Socrates was one of the founders of western philosophy.  The Greek Senate charged Socrates with “corrupting the minds of the youth,” and they sentenced Socrates to death.  The death of Socrates was the beginning of the downfall of Greece, for they had lost their “guidepost.”

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, like Socrates has been excommunicated from his position at a national laboratory by management that took offense to his proposals that threated their power structure.  His teaching credentials were canceled in a local church for “corrupting the minds of the youth” and not teaching the church’s official view on the subject. He was excommunicated from a church where he was a member in good standing for twenty years for publishing “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” [xi] and corrupting the minds of their youth and any other person in their church with science and philosophy.  Thank God for civil laws that protects our citizens from physical harm.

Our President has not chosen to listen to this gad fly, when he suggested that a workable compromise be initiated to resolve the conflict of space, control and authority in Iraq between the three different sects of Muslims. This was proposed by the Vice President, and now the reining authority in Syria has been added to the mix; he chose to put together a coalition of nations to wipe ISIS-ISIL from planet Earth.  ISIS-ISIL has retaliated with attacks against this coalition of nations and the USA hitting soft targets.  We should expect this activity to continue. The best outcome, using the best military forces on the planet,  for a military victory, will be guerilla warfare with the soft targets continuing to be hit by these guerilla fighters.  The only solution to the ISIS-ISIL conflict is a workable compromise – a permanent home for the displaced Sunni Muslims from their Iraq home.

Lessons from History

In 480 B.C. the Persians were set upon wiping the Greeks off the Earth or enslaving them.  The Persians greatly outnumbered the Greeks.  The Persians were under autocratic the rule of Xerxes; the Greeks were under democratic rule (one for all and all for one).   The Persians overran the Greek Spartans (trained warriors) at the pass of Thermopylae [xii] and sacked Athens, which had been evacuated by the Greeks.

The Persians had large war ships (similar to that of the USA navy, bigger than their opponents).  The Greeks built small maneuverable war ships with a torpedo like Ram on the bow of the ship (A trireme).  The Greeks lured the Persian navy in to the Aegean Sea where there were many islands presenting a maneuverable issue for the Persians.  With their mobility (like ISIS-ISIL), the Greeks ran circles around the larger Persian ships and rammed the Persian ships with their torpedo like Rams at the front of their ships and sank the Persian Fleet. [xiii]

Beware USA your large arsenal of weapons is being out maneuvered by an adversary who is focused on mobility.

The USA Transition from a Republic to a Democracy

The USA was formed as a republic and has been in a long transition to a democracy in small steps. This change has come about by allowing more of the population to vote in elections and it changed the way our President was elected.  In the beginning, only land owners could vote in the elections.  These were the people who had an invested interest in the profitability of the nation, much like that of stockholders voting in a corporation. [xiv]  The vote has slowly been extended, for various reasons, to other segments of our society who do not have an investment or knowledge of producing a profitable nation (women, teens, those on government assistance).  We certainly have improved on the lifestyles of our citizens, as have the Greeks, but our national debt is rising above our ability to pay the interest, which could eventually result in foreclosure on our property (nation) by our creditors (like the two bailouts of the Greeks by the EU in recent history).

The Life Span of a Democracy

The average lifespan for a democracy is about 170 years, as established by the Greeks.  In the Greek democracy, leaders were chosen by a lottery, thus minimizing payoffs and corruption in the government.  Serving as a leader was considered a duty of citizenship.  Ballots could be cast to remove a government leader from office and they would be exiled for ten years from their society. In the Greek democracy, only about 20 percent of the population could vote. [xv]   The Greeks now have more people on the government payroll than people paying taxes to support the government. Is this direction the USA wants to continue to pursue?

The Code of Conduct to Live Long in this Land

There is a “code of conduct” that was intended to provide for the continued success of a nation living long in the land that had been giving to them.  Unfortunately, these were given to a very religious people and they did not understand the economic implications of these Ten Codes of Conduct.  Unfortunately, these Ten Codes of Conduct are still seen as religious by almost our entire society, religious and secular alike.  When one sets aside their religious lens, the pragmatic lens shows that the economics of these Ten Codes of Conduct can be realized.  The original Codes of Conduct were given in an ancient language; therefore, the proper perspective is to look at them through the eyes of a parent giving instruction to their children so that they might live long in the land the parent was giving them to raise their generations.

  1. You will not listen to anyone but your father for guidance.
  2. You will not form addictions that will prevent you from making your own decisions.
  3. You will not use my name as an authority to cause trouble or discomfort for any other person on this planet Earth.
  4. You will take a day off, after every six days of work, and remember who gave you this land and enjoy your time with family and friends, and you will allow your employees time off to enjoy their family and friends, and you will not mow your lawn on this day and interrupt the peace of your neighbors.
  5. Remember what your mother and father taught you, and hand down those teaching to your children and grandchildren, that you might live long in this land I have given you.
  6. You shall not murder.
  7. You shall not steal.
  8. You shall not give false witness against your neighbor.
  9. You shall not seek an intimate relationship with your neighbor’s wife.
  10. You shall not scheme to gain possession of your neighbor’s property.
  11. You will not build a big mansion type house in your neighbor’s back yard.
  12. You shall keep the walk-ways, of your communities, free of “Foxtails” that injure our pets. [xvi]

QED

 

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates

[ii] https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[iii] Max Plank, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/max_planck.html/

[iv] NOVA: Dawn of Humanity DVD, http://www.shoppbs.org/home/index.jsp/

[v] Jesus on judging, negotiating

[vi] Matthew 7:2, The Bible

[vii] Matthew 5:25, The Bible

[viii] Luke 14:31-32, The Bible

[ix] Luke 1:1-4, The Bible

[x] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.worpress.com/

[xi] https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[xii] http://www.ancient.eu/thermopylae/

[xiii] National Geographic The Greeks DVD, 2016, http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/weaponswar/p/blpwtherm.htm/

[xiv] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/voting/  TBC

[xv] PBS, “The Greeks”, 2016

[xvi] http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/foxtail-grass-and-your-dog/

A Church Guided by Gossip or a Church Guided by the Holy Spirit?

Ver. 1.0.1

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/gossip

10/4/2015

Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft Societies

“Ferdinand Tonnies (1877-1988) saw a new type of society emerging. Tonnies used the term Gemeinschaft (Guh-Mine-shoft), or ‘intimate community,’ to describe the traditional type of society in which everyone knows everyone else and people share a sense of shared fate. In such a society, people toe the line because they are acutely sensitive to the opinions of others and know that if they deviate, others will gossip and damage their reputation. Although their lives are sharply controlled by the opinions of others, they draw comfort from being part of an intimate group.

Tonnies saw that industrialization was tearing at this intimate fabric of village life. He noted that, in this emerging society, personal ties, family connections, lifelong friendships were growing less important. They were being replaced by short-term relationships, individual accomplishments, and self-interests. Tonnies called this new type of society Gesellschaft (Guh-Zell-shoft), or ‘impersonal associations.’ As much as anyone might hate it, in Gemeinschaft society informal mechanisms such as gossip had been effective in controlling people. In this new world of Gesellschaft, however, gossip was of little use, and to keep people in line society had to depend on more formal agencies, such as the police and courts.”i

The Church has become a Gemeinschaft society – and “intimate community.” A community that is to be guided by the Personal Counselor, a.k.a. the Holy Spirit, that Jesus sent into the world during the Pentecost Festival after His ascension into Heaven. However, this writer has noticed some competition with gossip controlling the church. And when we have given members of the church a position of authority, and gossip rather than the Holy Spirit is in control, the community of the church can be led astray and damaged.

In the Covenant of one local church, the following was made a part of this Church Covenant: “I WILL PROTECT THE UNITY OF MY CHURCH
…By acting in love toward other members
…By refusing to gossip
…By following the leaders”

What do the Scriptures say about Gossip?

Proverbs:
 11:13”A gossip betrays a confidence….”
 16:28 “…a gossip separates close friends.”
 18:8 “The words of a gossip are like choice morsels; they go down to a man’s/ [woman’s] inmost parts.”
 20:19 “A gossip betrays a confidence; so avoid a man/ [woman] who talks too much.”
 26:20 “Without wood a fire goes out; without gossip a quarrel dies down.”
 II Corinthians 12:20 “….I fear that there may be quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder.”

Women and the Church

1 Corinthians 14:34-35“…As in all congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”

I Timothy 2:11 “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.”

Paul’s Letters and Gender Roles

“An example of gender roles would be gender roles depicted in the letters, which proscribe roles for women that appear to deviate from Paul’s more egalitarian teaching that in Christ there is neither male nor female. Separate male and female roles, however, were not foreign to the authentic Pauline epistles; the First Letter to the Corinthians (14:34–35) commands silence from women during church services, stating that “it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” This is widely regarded to be an interpolation by a later editor of 1 Corinthians of a passage from 1 Timothy 2:11–15 that states a similar “women should be silent in churches”. This made 1 Corinthians more widely acceptable to church leaders in later times. If verses before or after 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 are read, it is fairly clear that verses 34 and 35 were inserted later.”ii

Pauline authorship

For Pauline authorship

“Among the Apostolic Fathers, ‘a strong case can be made for Ignatius’ use of … 1 and 2 Timothy’. The unidentified author of the Muratorian fragment (c.170) lists the Pastorals as Pauline, while excluding others e.g. to the Laodiceans. Origen refers to the “fourteen epistles of Paul” without specifically naming Titus or Timothy. However it is believed that Origen wrote a commentary on at least the epistle to Titus.

Easton’s Bible Dictionary (1897) gives a date for the First Epistle to Timothy of around A.D. 66 or 67 and says of 2 Timothy, “It was probably written a year or so after the first, and from Rome, where Paul was for a second time a prisoner, and was sent to Timothy by the hands of Tychicus,” as the text indicates. Of the Epistle to Titus, Easton’s says “Paul’s authorship was undisputed in antiquity, as far as known, but is frequently doubted today. It was probably written about the same time as the First Epistle to Timothy, with which it has many affinities.”

“Adherents of the traditional position date the Epistle to Titus from the circumstance that it was written after Paul’s visit to Crete in Titus 1:5. That visit could not be the one referred to in Acts 27:7, when Paul was on his voyage to Rome as a prisoner, and where he continued a prisoner for two years. Thus traditional exegesis supposes that after his release Paul sailed from Rome into Asia, passing Crete by the way, and that there he left Titus “to set in order the things that were wanting.” Thence he would have gone to Ephesus, where he left Timothy, and from Ephesus to Macedonia, where he wrote the First Epistle to Timothy, and thence, according to the superscription of this epistle, to Nicopolis in Epirus, from which place he wrote to Titus, about A.D. 66 or 67.

Biblical Scholars such as Michael Licona or Ray Van Neste, who ascribe the books to Paul find their placement fits within his life and work and see the linguistic differences as complementary to differences in the recipients. Other Pauline epistles have fledgling congregations as the audience, the pastoral epistles are directed to Paul’s close companions, evangelists whom he has extensively worked with and trained. In this view, linguistic differences are to be expected, if one is to assert Pauline authorship to them. Johnson asserts the impossibility of demonstrating the authenticity of the Pastoral Letters.”

Against Pauline authorship

“On the basis of their language, content, and other factors, the pastoral epistles are today widely regarded as not having been written by Paul, but after his death. (Although the Second Epistle to Timothy is sometimes thought to be more likely than the other two to have been written by Paul.) Beginning with Friedrich Schleiermacher in a letter published in 1807, biblical textual critics and scholars examining the texts fail to find their vocabulary and literary style similar to Paul’s unquestionably authentic letters, fail to fit the life situation of Paul in the epistles into Paul’s reconstructed biography, and identify principles of the emerged Christian church rather than those of the apostolic generation.”

“As an example of qualitative style arguments, in the First Epistle to Timothy the task of preserving the tradition is entrusted to ordained presbyters; the clear sense of presbuteros as an indication of an office, is a sense that to these scholars seems alien to Paul and the apostolic generation.”iii

If we take the scriptures as “God’s unerring word,” women participating in church activities would be in trouble. On speculation, these passages look to appear from a practicing preacher, as they are almost word for word in I Corinthians and I Timothy. As an amateur platform speaker, I can attest to the frustration a speaker would have when he is delivering his important message and women are taking amongst themselves, interpreting what the speaker is saying. It seems women have an unrestrained need to share their thoughts and insights with their neighbor in the audience. The insertion of the “women not to speak in the church” into Paul’s writing in I Corinthians could have been an attempt to eliminate this urge of women to share their thoughts and insights while the speaker was speaking and to assert this frustration.

Church Covenants and Codes of Conduct

The following Church Covenants and Codes of Conduct is suggested for churches that deem these necessary.
I will protect the unity of the church:
 I will support and treat others with love and negotiate workable compromises in a win-win manner.
 By refusing to gossip or carry gossip forward or act upon gossip in the discharge of my church duties.
 By following the leadership of the Personal Counselor Jesus sent to us with my constant, real time, continuous seeking his guidance in my life.
 By remaining silent, except for an appropriate “Amen” of approval and support, and not discussing my insights with others as the speaker is delivering their message in general assembly.
 I will conduct outreach for the purpose of introducing the unchurched to Christ’s Teachings. I will not visit church members to ascertain their assets that I can use for my own personal purposes. Private assets are for the mission of the church as each member chooses to make them available to the church mission.

QED


i Henslin, James M., Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, “Sociology (A Down-to-Earth Approach) 5th ed.” Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, Massachusetts, 2001, p 107
ii https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastoral_epistles#Against_Pauline_authorship
iii Ibid

Is the Truth Found in Scripture or in Science?

Ver. 1.3.0

The Philosopher and Church Reformer, Twenty-First Century

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/Scripture-vs-science/

8/27/2015

Introduction

Experimental science has been around since Galileo (1564-1642), who has been attributed the title of “The Father of Modern Science” when he made a number of observations of planetary motion with his advanced hand-built telescope. His data proved “the 16th century Polish astronomer Copernicus’ suggestion of placing the sun at or near the center of the heavens and giving the earth an orbit equivalent to that which had previously been assigned to the sun. He published his ideas in the great book “De revolutionibus orbium celestial.The first copy was placed in his hands while he lay on his deathbed in 1543. Unknown to Copernicus, a preface had been anonymously added to this book by an officious clergyman, advising readers that the ideas in it were to be construed not literally but merely as hypotheses useful in simplifying the work of astronomers.” i

“The Ptolemy system put the earth at the center of the universe. The centers of planetary orbits were placed at some distance from the center of the earth, and such orbits were called eccentric, and most planets were given small circular orbits around centers which moved in large circles around the earth, and these smaller circles were called epicycles. This system took its name from Claudius Ptolemy, who brought it to completion about 150 A.D. It had been set forth by Hipparchus about three centuries earlier. Although the Ptolemaic system was defended by the followers of Aristotle, in reality it was the much older astronomy of Eudoxus (ca, 408-355 B.C.) to which Aristotle’s statements were originally intended to apply”.ii

The clergy in this time period favored the Ptolemy system of planetary motion, as it featured the earth as the unique and distinguished situation at the center of the universe, which agreed with what the clergy found in the Scriptures. This was also the position of philosophers as well as theologians, who taught that the heavenly bodies were created especially for the use and service of man, and that man was the subject of God’s principal care and concern. Also the Copernican system had the further disadvantage of requiring vast and rapid motions of the earth, which seemed to contradict all common sense and everyday experience.” iii

Galileo completed “Dialogue,” his proof of the Copernicus system of planetary motion, and sought to gain a license to print from Rome, the center of Catholic theology, and was granted permission to print. Printing began in June of 1631, and was completed in February of 1632. In August of 1632, Rome ordered the suspension of sales of “Dialogue.” In October of 1632, Galileo was ordered to Rome to stand trial. The Pope, in June of 1633, ordered rigorous examination; Galileo capitulated and was sentenced to indefinite imprisonment after humiliating abjuration. In December of 1633, he was placed in permanent house arrest and banned from any further publishing of his work. In 1635, the Latin translation of “Dialogue” was published at Strasbourg; an English version was made but not published. Galileo died January 8, 1642. “The Pope forbade the Grand Duke to erect a monument in Galileo’s honor if any word on it would ‘offend the reputation of the Holy Office’.” iv

The father of modern science died while imprisoned under house arrest, sentenced there by the “Holy Office” of Rome, which thought the Scriptures were the absolute truth, and science had to comply with the Scriptures or the science was not only wrong, but an act of heresy, which was a charge equivalent to a felony.

A back of the envelope calculation shows that, in the twenty-first century, modern science has been in use for less than 400 years. The Scriptures date back multiple centuries – greater than twelve centuries, and the New Testament Scriptures for just more than two centuries. The history of man is being rewritten by DNA analysis; similarly, the Scriptures need to be updated to coincide with the physical laws that God has created to keep his universe in good working order. And the church needs to update its theology to coincide with the developments of science and we are not done yet with finding out what God has created in His universe.

The New Deal

The New Deal began on the day of the Pentecost Festival, about fifty days after Jesus’ ascension into Heaven after His resurrection from dying on a Roman cross. The New Deal began with a bang, or as documented, by a ‘strong wind and tongues of fire’.v This was too big a deal for the followers of Jesus to understand. They received this gift of the Holy Spirit and acted in a manner they thought was appropriate, being given the responsibility to bring this New Deal to all nations.vi Did they get it right? If I were a gambling man, I would bet against them getting it right. For one thing, there is not mention of the Personal Counselor that Jesus sent to us to “Teach us all that we need to know,”vii Tell us what to say.viii . There is some mention of the Holy Spirit telling the Apostles where to go.ix But the New Deal was way over their heads; there was more delivered by Jesus than anyone in this time period could understand. Did the Apostles get it right? Not likely, given the circumstance and knowledge of the time.

The Pentecost Festival Event

In the Book of Acts of the Apostles 1:4 Jesus said, “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.” Book of Acts of the Apostles 2:1-6 says, “When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit enabled them.
“Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own language? …….we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own language! Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, ‘what does this mean?’”

This Pheromone is Difficult to Explain

Sound Waves

Sound waves are like ripples on a smooth pond. Toss in one stone and it will produce ripples on top of the water, going out in expanding circle. Throw two stones, at the same time, into the pond at slightly different positions, and the waves will interfere with each other. Toss ten stones into the pond at the same time at slightly different positions and the waves will be indefinable from each individual stone.

Given the difficulty of overcoming the physics of this situation is not an easy task. If the Apostles were all speaking at once, who could understand the resulting noise? Air waves are like the waves on the pond, only they are three dimensional waves, going out in a spherical manner from the source. The air does not move, but each air molecule pushes against its neighboring molecules until it reaches the ears of the hearer and then the air waves pulse on the ear drum, which the brain converts to sound. If there is no air between the speaker and the listener, there is no air wave and there is no sound produced.

An alternative explanation that allows the laws of physics to apply to this situation is that each Apostle is speaking in their own language and the listeners are hearing what they are speaking in their own language. This would be an easy task for the Holy Spirit to accomplish; the speech of the Galileans is translated by the Holy Spirit into the language of the listener.

The Joshua Problem

Galileo, in the 17th century, had a similar situation with what is known as “The Joshua Problem.” In Galileo’s time, there were two different theories on planetary motion: the Ptolemy theory that the earth rotated about the sun, and the Copernicus theory that the sun rotated about the earth. Though his self-made telescopes, Galileo produced data that proved the Copernicus theory as the correct theory – the earth rotated about the sun.

Galileo was a member in good standing with the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church had a problem with the Copernicus theory of planetary motion conflicting with the scripture. “The Joshua Problem” comes from Joshua 10:12-13: “On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel: ‘O sun stand still over Gibeon, O moon over the Valley of Aijalon.’ So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation triumphed over its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.” Galileo became known as the first experimental physicist because of his method of using data to prove or disprove a theory. But the resulting physics was in conflict with the Scriptures.

The problem with “The Joshua Problem” is the loss of centripetal force that keeps the earth in rotation about the sun. This is the force that counteracts the gravitational attraction of the earth and the sun. Without this centripetal force, the earth would be pulled into the sun. And if the earth stopped its rotation, how would it restart its rotation? Religion is based on people’s emotions and physics is based on the fundamental laws of physics that God put into place to maintain order in the universe. Galileo argued that the Joshua event happened during the summer solstice, when daylight would be at its maximum. Why would Joshua ask that the sun stand still at midday? Would it not be more plausible that the sun was setting and Joshua saw the time urgency for more daylight? Galileo also argued that using the Copernicus system of planetary motion, the sun would need to stop is own rotation and that would cause the earth, moon and stars to stop their rotation.

In both the Pentecost event and the Joshua event, the laws of physics that God put into place to maintain order in His kingdom, the universe, must be obeyed. “Science is the truth if you believe it or not.” – An Astro Physicist.

Science the Final Voice of Truth

There has been great effort by mankind to make these Scriptures the absolute word of God and the final truth of all matters. In the time of John Newton, (mid-18th century) John and three others founded the Eclectic Society (a select, diverse society not connected to any other group). “The spirit of the society was characterized by the informality of it proceeding, the seriousness of its spiritual discussions, and the commitment of its membership.”x When the Eclectic Society was revived by John Stott in 1955, a requirement that “members must accept the supreme authority of Scripture and avoid arcane theological arguments” was added to the society’s rules. This rule would certainly seriously limit the contribution that science can lend to the understanding of the Gospel that Jesus sent to us.
In reality, God created the physical world and he created the physics that brings order to His universe. Scientists discover how these wonders of the universe work together to bring harmony to His vast creation – the universe.
As this Astro Physicist pointed out, as he showed a photo taken from a spacecraft of the earth as a small dot below the huge rings of Saturn, “We are thinking too small when we concern ourselves only with the events taking place on this planet earth.”

Philosophy’s Contribution to Finding the Truth

Rene` Descartes, a 17th century philosopher, established a method for finding the truth. He wanted to find the truth for himself and not the truths that the religious and political authorities were promoting as the truth. Cutting through all the fog and clouds and eliminating all beliefs and opinions – no matter how many people had these beliefs and opinions – he doubted anything that he knew until he could establish a truth that he could convince himself was the truth. He then built upon these truths and bootstrapped his way to the larger truth.

This method was picked up by other 17th and 18th century philosophers and they became known as the “Enlightenment Philosophers” and began the era of “Reason.” This was the beginning of Modern Philosophy, replacing the Ancient Philosophy of finding the truth by argument and rebuttal.

The “Enlightenment Philosophers” influenced Thomas Jefferson in his writing of the Declaration of Independence from England incorporated the “Rights of Man” established by these Enlightenment philosophers. The English Enlightenment Philosophers influenced the bloodless revolution in England and the French Enlightenment Philosophers the French Revelation. Rene’ Descartes method of finding the truth has become known as “Autonomous Reflection.” A method still used today by CEOs, political leaders to lead their enterprises, research scientists, and whoever else wants to push the extents of the envelope of our knowledge of the truth.xi Jesus told us to find a quiet place like a closet, where one can hear themselves think and “Tell your Father, who is unseen, then your Father, who sees what is done in secret will reward you. …your Father knows what you need before you ask him.” xii

The Book of Genesis

Genesis 4:2 “….Now Abel kept flocks and Cain worked the soil”. In the development of man he was first a hunter and gather and a nomad. The keeping of flocks was a transition from hunter-gatherer to agrarian but since they still lived in tents they were still nomadic. Man did not learn about planting seeds in the soil and growing their own crops until the time that Jericho was forming as the oldest city on the planet. It was this new agrarian life style that allowed man to remain in one place. Therefore the book of Genesis must have been written after the founding of the city of Jericho. We do know that the agrarian life style originated in the Fertile Crescent on the Mediterranean Sea the same area that Abraham was located.

The Evolution of man

The Paleoanthropologists has not been able to link the evolution of ancient man that evolved from the ape to the modern man the Homo species. The two species, Ancient man and Homo have the same bone structure from the neck on down, but the skull shape and brain capacity are much different. There has not been found any transition species between the two. It is though one species disappeared and the other appeared on earth. These finding support the creation theory as modern man appeared on earth with no link to a past.xiii

Earth a Special Place?

Astronomers have observed that suns we call stars have planets similar to earth circulating around them, that is in the Goldilocks Zone (not to hot not to cold) and about the same size as our earth (not to large not to small) therefore having about the same gravity as earth. They estimate there are approximately four billion planets that could look like earth and therefore could have life on these planets like earth. We cannot see these planets because they do not give off light, but we can observe the decrease in light from the star as the planet passes in front of their sun. If Jesus is visiting these planets like He did earth, this is going to take up a lot of His time.

QED


i “Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo”, Translated by Stillman Drake, Anchor Books, 1957, pp 12-14
ii Ibid p11
iii Ibid p 12
iv Ibid P 286
v Acts 2: TBD
vi Mathew 28:TBD
vii John 14: 26
viii Luke 12:12,
ix Acts 9:11, 6, Acts 8:29,
x Jonathan Aitken, “John Newton” “From Disgrace to Amazing Grace”, Crossway, 2007, pp 289-293
xi https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/Autonomous-Reflection/
xii Matthew 6:6-8
xiii http://pbs.org

Now is the Time for All Good Churches to Come to the Aid of Their Country Ver. 1.2.2

The Philosopher
https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/country
5/18/2015

The USA Needs the Help of All Our Churches:

On September 11, 2001, the USA became involved in a religious war. Like it or not, the enemy is very religions and considerers the USA and its citizens to be infidels and thus worthy of death by any means possible. The USA’s Commander in Chief insists that we are not at war with any equitable religion, but the USA is not in a position to determine what religions are equitable and which are not. As Carl G. Jung noted, “We are surely making a great mistake when we forget this simple yet fundamental truth. If a neurosis should have no other cause at all than imagination, it would, none the less, be a very real thing. If a man imagined that I was his arch-enemy and killed me, I should be dead on account of mere imagination.”i

Separation of Church and State:

There is a long-standing tradition in the USA separating religion and state. The state’s solution to this new crisis is air raids and drone strikes and now, talks about American boots on the ground. In the beginning of this crisis with religion, I thought the churches could be involved with the presentation of the Gospel. But I have reached the conclusion that fighting religion with religion is only going to lead to an argument and not a solution. In addition, there is too much disparity between belief systems in USA churches to be effective at coming to the aid of our country. The churches of the USA would need a major overhaul to even make a small dent in this crisis.

The Gospel more Science than Religion:

This Philosopher has investigated the Scriptures and the Gospel and has reached the conclusion that the Gospel of Jesus is more science than religion. The major elements of tradition in the USA churches are the worship of Jesus, Baptism, the Lord’s Supper and prayer. The first two of these traditions were not on Jesus’s agenda; they are the makings of his followers. The Lord’s Supper was made into a tradition by the Apostle Paul as a solution to a problem with sharing food at the meetings of the converts in his churches.ii The Apostle Paul did not have firsthand experience with the deliverance of the Holy Spirit, a.k.a. the Personal Counselor, thus he only had secondhand knowledge of this event from the other Apostles and Jesus’s followers, who didn’t have a clear understanding of the enormity of what Jesus had sent to us on that day of the Pentecost Festival and ended up micromanaging his churches.iii The main focus of Jesus’s teaching while on Earth centered on prayer and communicating with our Father in Heaven.

Jesus, while on Earth, said that he would send us a Personal Counseloriv. On reaching his home in Heaven, He sent us his Personal Counselor into the world.v He told us The Counselor would teach us all that we needed to know.vi On examination of these teachings and events, it becomes clear that the Gospel that Jesus sent into the world was more about science than religion. In fact, it looks more like Mind Science, something of which we in this twenty-first century know very little. Therefore, the churches of the USA can come to the aid of their country – not with the existing paradigm of our understanding of the Gospel of Jesus, but with a new understanding of His Gospel and we approach the new Gospel of Jesus from a science base rather than a religious base. Just as many religious beliefs of the past have been shown to be science and not religion, so can the Gospel of Jesus be shown to be science and not religious. As Jesus told us, “One does not take a piece of cloth from a new garment and sew it on an old garment, nor does one put new wine into an old wineskin for both the old cloth and the old wineskin and new wine, will be lost. Those who have drunk the old wine will say that the old wine is better than the new.” Jesus is teaching an ancient audience about new and existing paradigms. The word “paradigm” had not yet been coined, but this is what Jesus was teaching us. The existing paradigm must be entirely replaced by the new paradigm.

With a science based Gospel, there is a good chance that the churches of the USA could be efficient and effective in defeating what we know to be unequitable religions. Unequitable religions that think the USA and its citizens are infidels that need to be exterminated.

Winning Over the Unequitable Religions:

We cannot win over these unequitable religions with air strikes and USA boots on the ground. The focus must be on the driving force behind this aggression. The USA needs to remember its past, particularly the War in Vietnam. The USA had the opinion that if the USA was in the fight we were going to win. It did not occur to these Commanders in Chiefs that we were fighting against an enemy that wanted to regain possession of its country. We are in a similar situation in the Middle East; ISIS and ISIL were displaced from their country by the actions of the USA and they want their country back. The USA cannot defeat an enemy when they are fighting to regain their home. The USA had a big hand in the development of these new crises. With more air strikes and, with USA boots on the ground, it can only get worse for the USA. This is Vietnam all over again.

Peace Proposal:

A proposal has been made to the presidents of the USA, Syria and the Prime Minister of Iraq, to negotiate a peace settlement with ISIS and ISIL with the formation of four new countries to be carved out of Iraq and Syria. The four nations would be Kurds in the north, Sunni and Shiite nations in Iraq and a new Syria carved from existing Syria for displaced Syrians. Once peace is attained in the Middle East, the Christian Churches of the USA would act to resolve the differences in these religions, by presenting the Gospel of Jesus from a scientific perspective, a non-religious perspective, not to glorify Jesus, but to present the Gospel that Jesus wanted for the world, to connect to his Personal Counselor and let the Personal Counselor guide those who have made this connection. This is the only responsibility of the Christian Churches of the USA.

The churches of the USA can come to the aid of their country if they can make the necessary change from a religious Gospel to the Gospel that Jesus wanted us to have. The universe is a whole lot bigger than Earth and its solar system and Jesus is the manager of all of it. In the days that Jesus delivered His Gospel, the knowledgeable world was smaller than the Earth. But in this twenty-first century, thanks to the Hubble Telescopevii and Kepler Telescopeviii, we now know the universe and the territory of Jesus is larger than anyone can imagine. Therefore, as the Olympic cry puts it, “Let’s go for the gold” and let the churches of the USA make a difference in this small part of Jesus’s territory called Earth.

The Mission of the Christian Churches of the USA:

Our objective must be to connect each and every soul on this planet with the Personal Counselor that Jesus sent to us. We are not here to glorify Jesus as the Lord of this planet but to connect people to him through His Personal Counselor. Jesus taught us to go into our closet and talk to our Father in Heaven.ix In today’s language this is known as “Autonomous Reflection.”x We must teach them this skill of communicating with the Personal Counselor, a.k.a. The Holy Spirit, as the guidance of the Personal Counselor has authority and priority over any written works that has been attributed, by man, as “The Word of God” or the Word of Muhammad or Buddha, Confucius etc. Our focus must be on the Personal Counselor that Jesus sent to us. To quote General George Patton “We are moving forward, either help or get out of the way”.

    This mission probably would best be carried out by members of the Deacons or Elders of a church. The Professional Christians may have a conflict of interest and too much knowledge on this subject.

    References:

    i C. G. Jung, “Psychology & Religion” Pub. New Haven and London Yale University Press, P 11
    ii I Corinthians 11: 20-26
    iii Acts 2:1-12 , I Corinthians 14: 1-25
    iv Acts 1: 4-5
    v John 14: 26, Acts 2: 1-12
    vi Ibid v
    vii http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2012/37/image/a/
    viii http://kepler.nasa.gov/
    ix Matthew 6: 6-7
    x Robert C. Solomon, “Introducing Philosophy” fourth ed. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Pub. 1977, pp 16-17
    “A French philosopher of the seventeenth century, Ren`e Descartes was one of the founders of the Enlightenment, and he is generally recognized as the father of modern philosophy. Descartes believed that each of us was capable of ascertaining what beliefs were true in the solitude of his own thinking. He insisted that he would accept as true only those ideas that were demonstrably true to him. Descartes insisted upon “clear and distinct ideas” and arguments based upon “the light of reason.” The modern philosophy of individual autonomy begins with Descartes. From Descartes on, the ultimate authority was to be found in our own thinking and experience, nowhere else.
    His method is both easy to follow and very much in accord with our own independent temperaments. Descartes used his philosophy to cut through the clouds of prejudice and unreliable opinions. He was concerned with their truth, no matter how many people already believed them, and no matter how few. Descartes’s arguments were his tools for finding this truth and distinguishing it from falsehood and mere opinion.“