1 Evolutionary Christianity by Rev. Michael Dowd. Quote cited at
http://www.thankgodforevolution.com/node/1994:
Given what we now know about our origins, the theist-atheist dichotomy no longer makes sense. Both presuppose a trivial, unnatural God and a Cosmos that is not itself divinely creative. Reality is my God and integrity is my religion. By this, I mean that what is real is my ultimate commitment and being in right relationship with Reality/God, and assisting humanity in this process, is my calling and deepest inspiration.
2 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
Sadly, society and parents insidiously put out messages from childhood on that others know what’s best. Many people are deeply conditioned to expect and hope some outside agency, power, or person will solve their problems. Letting go of expecting or even wanting this is difficult, partially because what one is left with is oneself, and all of one’s limitations. (p. 154)
To counter these experiences for our children, we oddly enough may want to listen to a former chief of neurology, Robert Burton, and his article “The Certainty Epidemic,”
We must learn (and teach our children) to tolerate the unpleasantness of uncertainty. Science has given us the language and tools of probabilities. That is enough. We do not need and cannot afford the catastrophes born out of a belief in certainty.
Read Burton’s whole article, “The Certainty Epidemic: We all seem convinced we’re right about politics, religion, or science these days. What makes us so sure of ourselves?” here.
3 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
“This is the serious challenge those who leave authoritarian groups face. People usually try to overcome this through a determination never to be duped again. … Behind most cynicism there is a disillusioned idealist (p. 153).”
“Disillusionment in itself is not the real problem. Awareness involves breaking through illusions, which, of course, is disillusioning (p.155).”
4 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
“Certainty must be able to withstand challenges and counter-evidence – anything that brings doubt. No amount of reason and experience can give the necessary kind of certainty, especially about the future. So faith is the key to religious certainty (p. 167).”
“…and simple explanations that can never be disproven are necessary for certainty. Everything that occurs is “a test of faith,” “a lesson,” “the will of God,” or “God works in mysterious ways.” These are some of the catechisms that keep certainty from being shaken (p. 168).”
Again we may do well to counter this certitude – we are certain of things because they are true, right (pun intended)? – with the understandings that Robert A. Burton, M.D. offers in his article On Being Certain:
But modern biology is pointing in a different direction. It is telling us that despite how certainty feels, it is neither a conscious choice nor even a thought process. Certainty and similar states of “knowing what we know” arise out of primary brain mechanisms that, like love or anger, function independently of rationality or reason. Feeling correct or certain isn’t a deliberate conclusion or conscious choice. It is a mental sensation that happens to us. …
To be aware of thinking, we need a sensation that tells us that we are thinking. To reward learning, we need feelings of being on the right track, or of being correct. …
To be an effective, powerful reward, the feeling of conviction must feel like a conscious and deliberate conclusion. As a result, the brain has developed a constellation of mental sensations that feel like thoughts but aren’t. These involuntary and uncontrollable feelings are the mind’s sensations; as sensations they are subject to a wise variety of perceptual illusions common to all sensory systems. Understanding this couldn’t be more important to our sense of ourselves and the world around us. …
At the same time as I am forced to consider the possibility that contrary opinions might have a grain of truth, I am provided with the perfect rebuttal for those who claim that they “know that they are right.” It is in the leap from 99.99999 percent likely to 100 percent guaranteed that we give up tolerance for conflicting opinions, and provide the basis for the fundamentalist’s claim to pure and certain knowledge.
5 Christian Atrocities: http://notachristian.org/christianatrocities.html
6 But, has God set the example that often justified these historically recorded killings? Though this site takes some liberties, the point of the chart is obvious.
“How many has God killed? (Complete list and estimated total),” by Steven Wells:
http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html
7 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
The truth or falsity of a given worldview may not ultimately be provable. But what can be shown is whether it is authoritarian. Authoritarianism is present in much that is taken for granted, often including what is held by some to be sacred. The prescription that what people hold sacred should not be criticized is itself unconsciously authoritarian. The sacred and the taboo go together – in particular the taboo against challenging the sacred. In our view, the sacred is formally made sacred precisely to protect it from criticism, because it cannot stand on its own (p.182).
8 Liberal Christians by and large don’t have this issue, for they tend to be more in line with typical truth seekers. They find truth and live it out in community with a bit more modesty, knowing their beliefs might be more probable than others’; the liberals’ truth is not an absolute authoritarian truth. A liberal Christian’s truth holds that it needs tempering with other discovered truths, unlike the conservatives’, which sees the need for all truths to be subservient to the one they possess. A liberal Christian knows that inerrancy of scripture is tenable at best, and that even if it was to be established, other religions are still valid paths to the Divine. In short, and in my opinion, they are more tolerant and more tolerable.
9 “The Modern Inerrancy Debate” by Dennis Bratcher: http://www.crivoice.org/inerrant.html
Speaking of the inerrancy debate from a more liberal view Bratcher states,
In many contexts it has become a shibboleth in promoting certain ideological agendas, and is being used by some as a means to divide and judge other Christians to the point that it creates more controversy and debate than it communicates anything positive about the Christian Faith or about Scripture. …
In the larger social and cultural scene, the whole concept of the inerrancy of Scripture may actually be having the opposite effect than many intend. It is intended to affirm the authority and value of Scripture as the sole guide to the Christian Faith, as the source of inspired instruction for meeting the spiritual and ethical challenges of a modern world. Yet the direction in which the concept has evolved and the manner in which it is being presented today both tend toward an “all or nothing” or an “either/or” acceptance of a whole range of ideological and theological ideas linked to the concept, with a corresponding militant attitude toward those who do not accept it in toto. The result has been that in many cases beyond the narrow circles of those who promote the concept, it has weakened the credibility of Scripture and created tremendous controversy, friction, and pain within the Christian community.
The author names names,
One other factor came into play in the development of the inerrancy debate. Most of the “defenders” in the early stages were from the Reformed tradition, especially fundamentalist Baptists (nothing at all here against Baptists; it is just a historical fact). That simply meant that the debate was cast nearly from the beginning in terms of narrowly focused theological concerns and agendas. Two closely related theological ideas from that tradition affected how the debate took shape: the emphasis on the total sovereignty of God, which works out into predestination in some circles; and the total depravity of humanity. …
So, this view of the inerrancy of Scripture was developed both from the pressures of culture, as well as from some very specific theological agendas. The Bible is then read through the lens of a doctrine developed totally outside Scripture itself, and often without taking seriously the evidence within Scripture. …
The defenders of Scripture began asserting things about Scripture that neither the Bible itself nor some of the theological positions outside of a narrowly interpreted Calvinism can possibly sustain. …
Many of his following points will be covered in this article.
This results in a circular argument. One can affirm inerrant autographs as inspired only by assuming a view of inspiration that produces inerrant autographs. …
…how can an inerrant text be produced from non-inerrant sources? If so, on what basis do we affirm that the sources are inerrant since they were not Scripture? This would leave open the logical possibility of other documents being inerrant that are not Scripture, which would undermine one of the primary reasons of affirming inerrancy in the first place: the unique authority of Scripture. …
Here is his less rigid approach to scripture.
However, I do not view Scripture in those terms. I do not understand the Bible itself to be direct revelation, and I do not consider it be revelation about everything. Scripture is the witness that the community of faith has borne to or about revelation. …
Scripture is revelatory only in the secondary or derivative sense that it is a witness and response to God’s revelation.
10 “Memory Tricks” by William Saletan: A writer for Slate and Gayatri Devi: Neurologist and clinical associate professor at New York University School of Medicine:
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/06/24/midmorning2/
11 Additional quotes supporting these points include:
“False memories are common”
http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20101008-21216-2.html
That is, witnesses who discuss an event with a co-witness are very likely to incorporate misinformation presented by the co-witness into their own memory for the event…
Once their memory has been contaminated in this way, the witness is often unable to distinguish between the accurate and inaccurate memories. – Dr. Helen Paterson
“How Much of Your Memory Is True?”
http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jul-aug/03-how-much-of-your-memory-is-true
Already it corrodes our trust in what we know and how we know it. It pokes holes in eyewitness testimony, in memoirs, in our most intimate records of truth. Every time we remember, it seems, we add new details, shade the facts, prune and tweak. Without realizing it, we continually rewrite the stories of our lives. Memory, it turns out, has a surprising amount in common with imagination, conjuring worlds that never existed until they were forged by our minds … Eventually you are not really remembering what happened; you are remembering your story about it. – Kathleen McGowan
12“Good Question: Text Criticism and Inerrancy”
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/october7/31.102.html
13 James Carse states, “But Paul has nothing to say about the life of Jesus, not a trace of his teachings or his healings. If we had to rely on Paul for a portrait of Jesus, we would know nothing more than Paul’s personal reaction to a mysterious event.”
http://www.salon.com/books/atoms_eden/2008/07/21/james_carse/index.html
Ironically many people find Paul to be the actual “founder” of Christianity, more than Christ himself. So having Paul, who had never even seen, let alone conversed with, Jesus as not being a part of the eyewitness accounts is quite substantial.
14 “An Open Letter to Neale Donald Walsch” by Bill Randles:
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/NealeDonaldWalsch.html
15 “Ages and Dispensations”
http://photos1.blogger.com/photoInclude/blogger/1917/1432/1600/prophecy_dispensation.jpg
16 Darin Weil’s article is titled, “Inerrancy and its implications for authority: Textual critical considerations in formulating an evangelical doctrine of scripture.” The article not only addresses the difficulties around the Old Testament inerrancy issues, but the whole cannon of protestant scripture “a doctrine of scripture must explain authorship, authority, divine and human origin, and the history of the text from composition to present day.”
True, this site may seem to be totally counter, or argue against, most of what I propose here. But in fairness I offer it knowing that in the end one has to trust this whole process to the mystery of God’s workings. To again quote Weil: “To answer this question, the doctrine of preservation was developed. The doctrine maintains that inasmuch as God divinely inspired the text He also divinely preserved it throughout the centuries. This, however, raises several other questions, namely, how did God preserve it?” Go here for the entire article.
17 Citation refers to excerpts from Bruce M. Metzger’s The text of the New Testament: Its transmission, corruption, and restoration
here: http://www.amazon.com/Text-New-Testament-Transmission-Restoration/dp/0195072979
18 http://www.rcbaptist.com/html/the_inerrancy_of_scripture.html
19 http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/1997/october27/7tc076.html
20 “The inerrancy of scripture: The fifty years’ war … and counting,” by R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
21“Wasn’t the New Testament written hundreds of years after Christ?”
http://www.carm.org/wasnt-new-testament-written-hundreds-years-after-christ
22 Reverend Michael Dowd, in his article titled “Giving Heresy a Bad Name!” writes,
Ironically, the early Church Fathers are directly responsible for the New Atheists phenomenon today—as is the concept of canon, or scripture. Once you declare that a set of writings in the past will forever be the best map of reality (and provide the most accurate picture of God and all the core concepts of your faith: sin, salvation, heaven, hell, etc) then you virtually guarantee that, at some point in the future, the one and only real God (Reality!) will raise up those who will attack that notion with the ferocity it deserves.
Find the entire article here.
23 To see an erudite summary of his book, reviewed by Robert M. Price: “RMP Reviews Hector Avalos, The End of Biblical Studies. Prometheus Books, 2007,” go here.
24 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
“Love and self-sacrifice are joined in all renunciate moralities. When unconditional love is made into prescription of how to be, it is really an authoritarian mechanism of control (p.297).”
25 “An Open Letter from Bishop Spong to Political Columnist George Will of the Washington Post.”
http://www.gaycatholicforum.org/html/body_spong_to_will.html
26 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
“When dealing with others who are less certain, simply having certainty gives dominance (p. 80).”
27 Kramer, J. & Alstad, D. (1993). The guru papers: Masks of authoritarian power. Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd.
The stance “I know a lot, but I can make mistakes” cannot compete with “I know everything that counts and never err about what’s important.” So those who play the knower role are under great pressure to put forth an image of certainty. (p. 47)
28 “God’s Hostages” by Sam Harris
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/sam_harris/2007/01/women_are_property_1.html
29 “Idolatry of the Written Word” by Rev. Michael Dowd http://www.thankgodforevolution.com/node/1985
Thinking and speaking of God in traditional ways (thereby using mostly biblical metaphors) has cost all forms of traditional faith in the western world both relevance and credibility. Indeed, I’d go so far as to suggest…The primary cause of the Church’s decline in size and influence in Europe, and now also in America, is this: valuing the Bible as the only scripture while failing to see that today’s science, interpreted meaningfully and mythically, reveals God’s nature, God’s ways, and God’s guidance in many ways far more accurately than anything the biblical writers could have accessed millennia ago.
30 “Dissecting God: Philosopher Daniel Dennett argues that America is drowning in religion – and that faith needs to be analyzed with the tools of science” by Gordy Slack
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/02/08/dennett/index.html
31Herbert L Calhoun’s review of, Arrogance Of faith: Christianity And race in America from the Colonial era to the Twentieth Century, by Forrest G. Wood can be read here.
Leave a comment
Comments feed for this article