Little Bits and Pieces

When on a journey through an unfamiliar land one needs to pay attention to any and all details, because it really is not clear what landmarks and artifacts are significant, and which ones are not.

This weekend is a matter of keeping track of some trivia - I am certain that some of it is important, I'm just not sure which is which.

• Pastor Ray again mentioned the open and welcoming approach of CTK to people of all stripes.  I feel welcome. A very canadian approach in my personal opinion :)
• A pre-requisite to membership is Baptism.  That makes sense once one thinks about it.  I hope I don't end up holding up the process for the rest of my family.
• Pastor Ray also mentioned how important is is to be true to the key elements of The Church beliefs and doctrine (my words, his were better).  I'm delighted to see that there is such a strong sense of integrity.  Even if the details are not important to me, I like the assurance that it's about truth.  Even if I don't complete the journey, it will comply with my personal sense of traveling with honor.
• One other item that came up during the new members class was a story about the enlightening of a well educated philosophy major.  I think that I may have found a guide for my journey.  I'll have to contact the Pastor and see if he can connect us.  (Action - me).  The other sub-text was that the journey will take some time (months to years).  There is comfort in that because it feels like there is some distance to travel.

The service this Sunday was cool.  It was hosted by the High School Youth Group.  One thought prompted by one of the skits was that I could purchase some $5.00 gift cards from Food Lion, and use them to give to the folks that panhandle at stoplights.  That would provide at least some comfort that the investment was being well spent.  Guilt-free giving !

And, saving the best (I guess) for last.  The sermon Sunday was about doubting Thomas.  This is not really a story about doubt, which I would equate to belief with reservation, or skepticism, but about the inherent nature of belief.  Where does it come from?  Where does one find it?  I'm sure that part of the answer is simply "from the people around me", namely a gradual adjustment of assumptions based on the stated beliefs of the community. I'd like to believe (ha ha) that it is something more, but it will require some examination. (Action - me).

* as above, thanks to Paraflyer on Flikr.

The wonderful Messiah (not what you're thinkin' :D )

A quick update post - no significant progress.

Well, Easter Sunday was a minor first on a couple of fronts. It was my first traditional service, and the first when I realized that I am a musical traditionalist.

On the traditional service front I did not really learn / grow / develop much. The Easter Sunday service story is one that even a heathen already knows (at least in outline), so, aside from reinforcing some already-present (and unprocessed) messaging, this was not much of a developmental moment.

On the musical front, reinforced by the preponderance of song at this traditional service, I realized that my strong liking for vocal music persists, as does my love of Handel's Messiah. It is apparently a tradition that members of the church join the choir for a rendition of the Hallelujah Chorus. It was somewhere between wonderful and surprisingly good. In spite of all of the amateurs all parts were well sung, the effect was balanced, and the impact was real. That piece of music still brings tears to my eyes. Strange outcome for a heathen :D

Another Step (or half step?)

Class
We are philosophically  aligned!  The new-members class at the church described the formal rules of the arm church that we are looking to join as "Liberal".  This apparently means (in this case) that women are treated equally, and that people are welcomed to participate without stringent membership rules.  I guess that the only down-side is that they may let riffraff like yours truly in the door.


Learning: Line of  Inquiry #1 - the Nature of God.
Learning is different than being taught.  I'm planning to learn. (how's that for a wishy-washy commitment?).  Part of the active learning investment has been to do some reading, starting with "The Science of God" by Schroeder. I'm just part of the way through, but it has started some interesting trains of thought.

One fundamental assertion of the book is that Science and Genesis are aligned, with respect to describing the first 15 billion years of the universe.  The presentation is logical, even if I am not sufficiently schooled in either cosmology or religion to be able to fact-check all of the components of the argument.  One of the questions that this part of the book initially left me with (as it might any heathen) was,  why is this so important that they align?  So what if our understanding and representation of either cosmology or Genesis is incorrect?  As we learn more they should get closer and that should be enough.

The "aha" is as follows.  This is important because the Bible is the word of God, and as such cannot be wrong.  If the Bible contradicts observations of the real world, then we must resolve the contradiction.  That of course sends me into another line of inquiry - "how was Genesis written?" How did the authors (I know - I have a lot to learn) know what to write, without the knowledge imparted by the scientific community of the 21st century? Did the authors share an understanding with Schroeder of the time dilation aspect of the first 7 days that is asserted by Schroeder, or was it a matter of simply transcribing  the word of God?  What did they transcribe it from?  Also, what motivated the choice of  7 (logarithmically time-dilated) days as the model?  Why not just use vague sorts of "long time" language.  It looks like I need to understand the complete history of the bible, once I have completed aligning the Bible with my pro-science predisposition.

There is so much to learn :D