'Nontheist Friends'' art. in Wikipedia, new interesting definition in "back end" of Wikidata
~ NtF - nontheist Friends
*
| Mar 14, 2021, 1:48 PM (8 days ago) |  | ||
| ||||
Dear Nontheist Friends, NtFs, All,
Greetings! I just found a new definition of "Nontheist Quakers" in Wikidata, which I find interesting:
"People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural"
(NtF Q-item # Q7049628 accessible from - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
What do you think? Thoughts, questions, suggestions, ideas?
Here the idea of NtFs is finding its way into Wikipedia I.T. infrastructure - and potentially for translating into other languages, and thus connecting people NtF-wise in these regards too.
Wikipedia articles may well get translated with
[Abstract-wikipedia] Newsletter #18: Two prototype tools to visualize lexicographic coverage in Wikidata
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
including Wikipedia articles about Nontheist Quakers for example :)
Cheers,
Scott
- https://wiki.
NtFs' Wikidata Q-item # -
FROM - and linked with -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
English
Nontheist Quakers
People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural
Spanish
Cuáquero no teísta
Traditional Chinese
No label defined
No description defined
Chinese
No label defined
No description defined
--
English
Nontheist Quakers
People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural
Spanish
Cuáquero no teísta
Traditional Chinese
No label defined
No description defined
Chinese
No label defined
No description defined
--
- Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
- 415 480 4577
- CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 2:21 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Dear NtF Planning, Greetings! Am sharing this email to you from this email address (which I just shared with the NtF larger group in Google email group) ...
NtF cheers, Scott
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 2:52 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
I like the definition.
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 3:02 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
It is a good definition as far as I am concerned.
Margaret Conrow
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 3:24 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Margaret, nontheist Friends, NtFs or NtQs,
I agree! Thank you, Margaret, for sharing your thinking!
Nontheist Friends' cheers,
Scott
PS
I wonder how one might explore or explain sociologically or in English literature what goes on in Silent Meeting (in the manner of Friends) then. Could it be (for me) a settling in, centering down and gathering process, and a sharing of caring information (even as technologies re Friendly language) re messages in Meeting - so non-supernaturally (and what role might the word "inner Light" play here I wonder too, perhaps as metaphor, but regarding Quaker practices, and per the Wikidata Q-item # for NtFs or NtQs ?)? ...
Thank you!
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 5:51 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Sounds good to me.
Anita
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 6:18 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
> "People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the
> supernatural"
> (NtF Q-item # Q7049628 accessible from -
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I still prefer David Boulton's definition of not believing in a
person-like creator God.
I suspect that the word "supernatural" is a loaded term for many theist
Friends. There's believing in fairies and poltergeists, but that's
qualitatively different than having a deep personal connection to a
spiritual experience of the presence of the Christ within. To lump Jesus
in with "the supernatural" is to deny the meaning, depth and personal
significance of that category of experience. Even as I don't personally
share it, I can respect it in others and share with them a religious
practice of worship in the manner of Friends. As a self-identified
nontheist Friend, my disbelief in a person-like creator god is not
grounds for denying the material realities of our behavior and
interactions together in our shared religious community, nor is another
Friend's belief therein. It seems insulting to Christ-centered Friends
to say that Jesus and/or God is supernatural, in the context of how we
typically use the word, meaning "not real". Better to say Jesus and/or
God is within us all, as Fox maintained, (and with which I can agree)
acknowledging its reality as centered within our varied personal
experiences.
My perspective is that human experience is a physical, material
phenomenon manifested as patterns of spreading activation among the
neural networks of our brains. Much of what we experience is not
congruent with scientifically veridical measurable phenomena (e.g.
visual illusions, or socially constructed interpretations of what
others' behavior signifies, etc.) but it is nonetheless real, insofar as
the neural activity has a measurable material makeup. That is to say,
even hallucinations are real, despite not being shareable for scientific
verification. We can re-focus our attention to the question of what do
mean by something being "real", but that leaves us in a morass since
we're all just assemblages of quarks in "reality". Is the experience of
"mindfulness" real? In reality the physicists still have a lot to figure
out about what the real world actually is.
So, as it turns out, I believe if we measured it scientifically with a
properly sampled and scientifically validated survey, we would find out
that most theist Friends would agree that the God they believe in is not
physically material, even if that God is believed to have powers of
intervention in the physical world. So there is not a lot to be worth
arguing about as to whether God is real. What is real is that there
actually are real, physical human beings, and they do have power to
intervene in the physical world, so let's intervene together and make
the world a better place. (If we can come to clearness on what that
means and how to do it in the manner of Friends...)
-Dave
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 7:45 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Great, Anita, NtFs, All,
Thoughts about Dave's observations?
Am not sure how to change a Wikidata short description, if NtFs wanted to -
FROM - and linked with -
NtQ cheers, Scott
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 7:55 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Easier to edit and teach to or learn from the Wikipedia article (than the Wikidata Q-it3m #), I think.
But beyond the NtF conversation & sharing potential in group email (like this Google Group), perhaps sharing one's thinking on some of main NtF pages could have merit too -
And there are some NtF #Hashtags in these regards too, eg - https://twitter.com/hashtag/
Friendly greetings,
Scott
World Univ and Sch Twitter - http://twitter.com/
Languages - World Univ - http://twitter.com/
WUaS Press - https://twitter.com/
Scott MacLeod - https://twitter.com/
“Naked Harbin Ethnography” book (in Academic Press at WUaS) - http://twitter.com/
OpenBand (Berkeley) - https://twitter.com/
Languages - World Univ - http://twitter.com/
WUaS Press - https://twitter.com/
Scott MacLeod - https://twitter.com/
“Naked Harbin Ethnography” book (in Academic Press at WUaS) - http://twitter.com/
OpenBand (Berkeley) - https://twitter.com/
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 9:06 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Friendly greetings to All
I welcome Dave’s comments and his observation that “supernatural” may be a loaded term for Christ centered Friends, although that had not occurred to me.
He suggested it be replaced with David Boulton’s definition, “non-belief in a person-like creator God”. I would support that change.
I don’t know who decides what data is entered, or how changes are made. I trust you to follow through Scott, and thank you for doing so.
claire cafaro
*
| Sun, Mar 14, 9:39 PM (8 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Hi Claire, NtFs,
Thanks so much for your thoughts. Wikipedia is interestingly open - a bit like Friends' Meetings - where the last person who edits an article often seems like the person sharing in Meeting, until a next person shares ... but where there isn't really a conversation going on in Quaker Meeting. (I'm also not making edits to Wikipedia these days, - and welcome any of you to edit, write to, teach at, either - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Scott
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 5:26 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Greetings Friends!
I don't think we should worry about definitions. To define something is to lock down its meaning, and that's not always a good idea. I guess there's a hundred ways of defining "nontheist Quaker", but none of them need to be adopted as our official self-definition. If I have described nontheism as not believing in a personal God, I never intended that to become our official definition. We don't need one.
David raises interesting questions about the use of the word "supernatural". I believe God is supernatural in the literal sense that he is over, beyond and outside nature. Those who see God as the creator of the natural universe are themselves claiming that he is supernatural or supranatural, even if they shy away from the words, so they cannot logically complain if we explain our position as not believing in a supernatural God. But I agree with David that we need to be sensitive in our use of a word which might seem dismissive of others' experience.
David Boulton
I don't think we should worry about definitions. To define something is to lock down its meaning, and that's not always a good idea. I guess there's a hundred ways of defining "nontheist Quaker", but none of them need to be adopted as our official self-definition. If I have described nontheism as not believing in a personal God, I never intended that to become our official definition. We don't need one.
David raises interesting questions about the use of the word "supernatural". I believe God is supernatural in the literal sense that he is over, beyond and outside nature. Those who see God as the creator of the natural universe are themselves claiming that he is supernatural or supranatural, even if they shy away from the words, so they cannot logically complain if we explain our position as not believing in a supernatural God. But I agree with David that we need to be sensitive in our use of a word which might seem dismissive of others' experience.
David Boulton
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 5:44 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Why do we need to have one definition of NonTheist Quakers? Why not offer several, as dictionaries do for most words?
Anita
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 8:43 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
It’s amazing how this chance discovery of an obscurely located definition in Wikidata by Scott Macleod should generate such a flurry of activity on this generally quiescent mail group.
I agree completely with David Boulton - definitions often stifle thought, but this has done the opposite!
I wish we could repeat this reflection on the U.K. NFN website - https://nontheist-Quakers.org.
Trevor Bending
Sent from my iPhone
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 9:32 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
I think it is interesting to look at the pivot point in the history of the Wikipedia page. It happened back on the 12th of July 2007. The previous version (here) read:
A nontheist Friend or nontheist Quaker is a Quaker who does not accept a belief in a theistic understanding of God, a Supreme Being, the divine or the supernatural.
The next edit (here) read:
A nontheist Friend or nontheist Quaker is someone who identifies with, engages in and/or affirms Quaker practices and processes, but who does not accept a belief in a theistic understanding of God, a Supreme Being, the divine or the supernatural.
What I like about this switch (by Wikipedia user Aphilio, i.e. Scott MacLeod who started this thread) is that it brings Quaker practices to the fore.
When this got added to WikiData (here) it was tidied up to the one Scott mentioned above:
People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural
I agree that definitions can stifle, but they can also be a useful piece of sand-in-the-oyster.
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 11:00 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
I'm not fond of the "not-supernatural" definition either. As one commenter has said, for many people that just means "not real" and that doesn't work. I am a Quaker Without God and will write later what that means to me - but I certainly believe in many things that are invisible. Maybe the first was, the love I received from my parents, which I am certain survives - possibly only in my memory, but still "real" in every way that matters - long after their deaths. From my 12 step group I have thought a lot about a "higher power" - which I do believe is needed for recovery from almost any addiction. But I don't really like "higher" or "power" - it's OK for you to laugh at my rebelliousness. I have settled on "deeper connections," and have identified what are those connections for me. I'll write later to say I'm very happy that here in St. Paul MN (Twin Cities Friends Meeting) we have re-begun our Quakers Without God group, meeting monthly via zoom. At the first re-convening, I heard many statements from sisters and brothers in unbelief, that made sense to me - and it made my heart sing. Hmm THAT sounds "supernatural."
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 11:20 AM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
The comments now grow more interesting than the definitions!
I see ‘dumbledad’, in his reply has remove the thread history - never mind! (I’ll try not to finish every sentence with a !)
Not being an IT specialist in HCI as dumbledad is, I had no idea all this stuff went on in the background of wikipedia/wikimedia/wikidata etc. (I hope y’all cough up your £10-20 or $15-25 each Xmas when Jimmy asks for it).
I had no idea either that ‘Aphilo’ might be the said Scott MacLeod (have I got that right?)
Interesting that ‘dumbledad’ has put in all those hypertext links to the history of the evolving definition, how it ended up more succinct and love the metafor (down spellchecker, down) of the ‘sand-in-the-oyster’.
One of those links led me to the Spanish version of the wikipedia page so you can have a look at that too - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I of course am ‘naked’ on the internet (I use my real name) but how many of you can identify ‘dumbledad’and should I reveal his identity here?
(I have wondered if it is a term of endearment by the children).
Trevor Bending (trevor@humber.co.uk)
I see ‘dumbledad’, in his reply has remove the thread history - never mind! (I’ll try not to finish every sentence with a !)
Not being an IT specialist in HCI as dumbledad is, I had no idea all this stuff went on in the background of wikipedia/wikimedia/wikidata etc. (I hope y’all cough up your £10-20 or $15-25 each Xmas when Jimmy asks for it).
I had no idea either that ‘Aphilo’ might be the said Scott MacLeod (have I got that right?)
Interesting that ‘dumbledad’ has put in all those hypertext links to the history of the evolving definition, how it ended up more succinct and love the metafor (down spellchecker, down) of the ‘sand-in-the-oyster’.
One of those links led me to the Spanish version of the wikipedia page so you can have a look at that too - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I of course am ‘naked’ on the internet (I use my real name) but how many of you can identify ‘dumbledad’and should I reveal his identity here?
(I have wondered if it is a term of endearment by the children).
Trevor Bending (trevor@humber.co.uk)
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 1:15 PM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Great to read, NtFs, Non-theist Friends, NtQs, All,
Thanks for bringing the word 'thinking' to the fore, Trevor. Appreciating the diversity of thinking here regarding both non-theism as well as Friends or Quakers. I'm reminded of a family friend (in Pittsburgh, PA, from my high school years) with whom my family spent Xmases together for a meal for some 23 years, who was a Lacanian psychoanalyst psychiatrist MD, and married to a Quaker, with his kids brought up as Quakers, and his thinking about non-theist Friends; - and could he have helped coined the 'non-theism' Friends' term and philosophically even in the 1970s, even psychiatrically, since religion with its emphasis on the counterfactual??? of the divine created much (damaging) fantasy ideation, in his knowledge/experience from working clinically with patients? (I have a recollection of him suggesting that he contributed to coining the term 'non-theist Friends.' And he was a very brilliant psychiatrist (was George L Alexander MD a genius? ... seems impossible to define the genius word, he might have suggested) in many ways, thinking-wise, and philosophically as well as linguistically; here's an article again by him from "Friends' Journal" -
"Separation of Church and State," January 1, 2008 By George L. Alexander MD https://www.friendsjournal.
Regarding the Wikidata Q-item statement about 'non-theist Quakers' - https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
NtF Cheers, Scott
FROM - and linked with -
PS
Thinking-wise, and philosophically -
Are any of you receiving the summaries of papers, about weekly, from PhilPapers - https://philpeople.org/
PPS
British NtFriends esp. -
Do you know of any philosophy colloquium email groups with Cambridge or Oxford University philosophy talks (appreciating their excellence), newly online - and open and welcoming ie somehow f/Friendly:) - in the coronavirus pandemic?
PPPS
I was fascinated in preparing a bit for this upcoming Harvard Philosophy colloquium to hear Sally Sedgwick talk of "the dignity of reason in everyone" (in this - https://shows.acast.com/
Sally Sedgwick on Kant and Hegel 2014
https://shows.acast.com/If anyone is interested in this upcoming Harvard talk with thinker Sally Sedgwick, you can join here I think -
[Bos-Phil] Re: 3/26: Harvard University Department of Philosophy Colloquium Lecture: Sally Sedgwick (Boston University)
https://harvard.zoom.us/
https://philosophy.fas.
https://www.bu.edu/philo/2021/
https://harvard.zoom.us/
https://philosophy.fas.
https://www.bu.edu/philo/2021/
Holding out a bit of hope for non-theist friends' (small f) inclusiveness
& re -
--
- Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
- 415 480 4577
- CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 2:24 PM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Nope, ’twas not me that used the word thinking (or think) - not once, the concept (thought?) perhaps but not the word!
It was the said dumbledad - a Friend of yours Scott. Maybe email him and see what happens?
Trevor Bending (trevor@humber.co.uk)
It was the said dumbledad - a Friend of yours Scott. Maybe email him and see what happens?
Trevor Bending (trevor@humber.co.uk)
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 2:47 PM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
'Twas not the gerund 'thinking,' but the past tense 'thought' word which I was referring to from your first email in this thread, Trevor, and NtFs! Tim?
Thanks, Scott
NtFs haven't explored NtF-wise thinking too much about the Quaker concept of conscientious objection, that I can recall, and re - this 'CO' label, - https://scott-macleod.
*
| Mon, Mar 15, 3:07 PM (7 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
NtFs, nontheist Friends, NtQs, All,
Friendly greetings, Scott
*
| Tue, Mar 16, 3:02 AM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Hi All,
One more though about definitions …
While I agree that definitions can tie one down, and in a way are not Quakerly (to misquote Fox, “You will say, Definition 1 saith this, and Definition 2 saith that; but what canst thou say?”), but they also bring out similarities. I remember a lovely observation during one of the UK Nontheist Friends’ conference: someone had been approached by a Christ-centric Friend after meeting one day who said that one of the things about the emergence of nontheist Quakers as an identifiable group was that everybody talked more about God. I.e., because we do not believe in God, we have prompted Quakers who do believe to think carefully about what they mean by “God” and to try and be precise in their language. This in turn has led (I think/hope) to a greater feeling of overlap between the beliefs of theist and nontheist Friends.
Cheers,
Tim.
*
| Mar 16, 2021, 5:11 AM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
There needs to be a distinction made between 'person-like' or 'personal' and 'an entity who is a person'. God cannot be an entity who might or might not exist. But the qualities or energies or whatever which many theists mean by 'God' usually include personal aspects such as love. If we reject 'personal' we are in danger of rejecting 'love', which we may not want to do. Rejecting the supernatural seems a better course.
But I agree that definitions, while perhaps helpful to the casual enquirer, are not what we are mainly about.
Jeanne Warren
(Oxford Meeting, England)
But I agree that definitions, while perhaps helpful to the casual enquirer, are not what we are mainly about.
Jeanne Warren
(Oxford Meeting, England)
*
| Tue, Mar 16, 8:27 AM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
A good story, Tim, but the comment that the good thing about nontheist Friends is that they have got Quakers talking and thinking about what they mean by God was not made by a Christocentric Friend after a MfW but by Jan Arriens, writing in Friends Quarterly. Jan is a good friend of mine and he has described himself as a nontheist, albeit one who is very critical of those of us who self identify as humanist Quakers.
David B
*
| Tue, Mar 16, 8:38 AM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Ah, I realise I have mis-remembered. In an article in the Friends Quarterly responding to the editor’s accusation that the NFN was an “entryist” group subverting Quakerism, I quoted an unnamed critic of the NFN who had said the good thing about the Network was that it was making Friends think about what they meant by God. The editor challenged me to name the Friend so that he could check up on me. I called Jan Arriens who said he had no objection to my naming him as my source. So I did, and the FQ editor accepted it.
That’s how I remember it. But as my previous posting shows, I’ve forgotten quite a lot of my memories…
David B
*
| Mar 16, 2021, 3:19 PM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
I don’t think that anyone thinks “Real” and “Supernatural” are synonyms so I don’t know why anyone would
Think “not real” and “not supernatural” are synonyms. If they do, they do, but it still isn’t “true”.
I believe love is “real,” that does not make it “supernatural” I think love is natural. And yes, it is
Invisible. I do like “deeper connections”, but that is not “clear” either. Deeper than what?
Well, anyway, I am glad we are discussing something together again.
Looking forward, Bonnie, to your next message.
On Mar 15, 2021, at 12:00 PM, Bonnie Peace Watkins <minnbonnie@gmail.com> wrote:This email originated from outside of K-State.
*
| Tue, Mar 16, 4:40 PM (6 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Tim, NtFs and All,
Thanks for this further focus on Nontheist Quakers, NtFs, and in Wikidata & Wikipedia - and regarding writing about NtFs (whether it be definitions, or books, or articles, etc.) especially. It seems that the Nontheist Quakers' Q-item # statement, which I'm posting below, is interestingly less changeable, than the NtQ Wikipedia article, which I'm posting below too (since it changes), and which will have implications for Nontheist Friends as these Wikipedia articles potentially get translated into 299 other articles in other Wikipedia languages.
Am curious how to add just this Google Group thread with so many good ideas about the idea of nontheist Friends to this wiki school for example -
or in the Wikipedia NtQ article itself - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Does anyone know how to 'reference' a Google Group thread for future easy access, and because it's an expression of many people's thinking, and not just one?
Regarding Margaret's observations just now about love or connecting, and the real, and the natural too, more later regarding Lacan and Lacanian psychoanalytic psychiatrist George Alexander MD (who was ARELIGIOUS, I think, and conscious language-wise of the harm that religion can do to people from his clinical practice) - and how writers about Lacan's thinking have engaged the concept of mysticism (close to some Friends' hearts, I think) and even the idea of conversion, which (Nt?)Friends may explore in the word "convincement." Appreciating George's philosophical thinking, scepticism, and keen mind as an individual here, and who worked psychotherapeutically with his analysands as individuals, and with language.
NtF Cheers, Scott
Nontheist Quakers' Q-item #
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
FROM - and linked with -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Nontheist Quakers' Q-item #
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
English
Nontheist Quakers
People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural
Nontheist Quakers' Q-item #
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
FROM - and linked with -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Nontheist Quakers' Q-item #
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
English
Nontheist Quakers
People who engage in Quaker practices but who do not believe in the supernatural
Nontheist Quakers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nontheist Quakers (also known as nontheist Friends or NtFs) are those who engage in Quaker practices and processes, but who do not necessarily believe in a theistic God or Supreme Being, the divine, the soul or the supernatural. Like traditional Quakers, also known as Friends, nontheist Friends are interested in realizing peace, simplicity, integrity, community, equality, love, joy, and social justice in the Society of Friends and beyond.
Beliefs[edit]
Quakers in the unprogrammed or "silent worship" tradition of Quaker practice have in the 20th century begun to examine the significance of nontheistic beliefs in the Society of Friends, as part of the Quaker tradition of seeking truth. Non-theism among Quakers probably dates to the 1930s, when some Quakers in California branched off to form the Humanist Society of Friends (today part of the American Humanist Association), and when Henry Cadbury professed agnosticism
Current resources include a nontheist Friends' website and there are nontheist Quaker study groups.[4] Os Cresson began a recent consideration of this issue from behaviorist, natural history, materialist and envir
Nontheist Friends tend to share the Religious Society of Friends (RSOF) historic Quaker peace testimony and support for war resistance and conscientious objection.
There are currently three main nontheist Quakers' web sites, including the Nontheist Friends' Official Website,[4] Nontheist Friends Network Website (a listed informal group of Britain Yearly Meeting),[9] and the Nontheist Friends' wiki subject/school at World University and School,[10] which was founded by Scott MacLeod.
Nontheist Friends are a group of individuals, many of whom are affiliated or involved in the unprogrammed tradition in Quakerism. Nontheist Friends are attempting sympathetically to generate conversation with others who are more comfortable with the traditional and often reiterated language of Quakerism. Some nontheistic Friends see significance in this lower-case / upper-case distinction in terms of inclusiveness and friendliness, welcoming both to the ongoing NTF email list conversations. Questioning theism, they wish to examine whether the experience of direct and ongoing inspiration from God ("waiting in the Light") – "So wait upon God in that which is pure. ..."[11] – which traditional Quakers understand as informing Silent Meeting and Meeting for Business, might be understood and embraced with different metaphors, language and discourse.
Books[edit]
- Boulton, David (Ed). 2006. Godless for God's Sake – Nontheism in Contemporary Quakerism. Nontheist Friends.
- Cresson, Os, and David Boulton (Foreword). 2014. Quaker and Naturalist Too. Morning Walk Press.
Notable Nontheist Friends[edit]
See also[edit]
- American Friends Service Committee
- Christian atheism
- Friends Committee on National Legislation
- Nontheistic religion
References[edit]
- ^ Cadbury, Henry (1936). "My Personal Religion". Retrieved July 17, 2007.
Unpublished manuscript in the Quaker Collection at Haverford College; lecture given to Harvard divinity students in 193.
- ^ Tatum, Lyle (ed.). 1952. "Handbook for Conscientious Objectors." Philadelphia, PA: Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors.
- ^ Morgan, Robert (1976). Report from the Workshop for Non-Theistic Friends – Friends General Conference, Ithaca, NY, June, 1976.
'The author of this report is 'Workshop for Non-Theistic Friends'. The workshop was led by Robert Morgan (1916–1993), a Friend from Pittsburgh PA.' Morgan was therefore 'recording clerk' for this report).
- ^ a b "NontheistFriends.org".
www.nontheistfriends.org. - ^ Cresson, Os (September 16, 2010). "Roots and Flowers of Quaker Nontheism". NontheistFriends.
org. - ^ Boulton, David, ed. (2006). Godless for God's Sake: Nontheism in Contemporary Quakerism. Dent, UK: Dales Historical Monographs. ISBN 0-9511578-6-8
. - ^ Benson MD, Herbert and Miriam Z. Klipper. 2000 [1972]. The Relaxation Response. Expanded updated edition. Harper. ISBN 0-380-81595-8
- ^ Benson MD, Herbert. 1976. Steps to Elicit the Relaxation Response.RelaxationResponse.
org. From "The Relaxation Response." HarperTorch. - ^ "Non-theist Friends Network". Non-theist Friends Network.
- ^ "Nontheist Friends' wiki school at World University and School".
- ^ Royce, Josiah. 1913. "George Fox as a Mystic" Cambridge, MA: The Harvard Theological Review. 6:1:31-59. JSTOR 1506970.
- ^ Anderson, Sam. 2011. "Nicholson Baker, The Art of Fiction No. 212." The Paris Review(198).
Further reading[edit]
- Boulton, David. The Trouble With God: Building the Republic of Heaven.
- Boulton, David. 2016. Through a glass darkly: A defence of Quaker nontheism. Cumbria, UK: Dales Historical Monographs.
- Case, Nat. 2013. I contradict myself: I am an atheist and a Quaker. Does it matter what I believe, when I recognise that religion is something I need?. London, England: Aeon Magazine.
- Cresson, Os. 2007. Roots and Flowers of Quaker Nontheism. NontheistFriends.org. Jan 23. Accessed online: Dec 30, 2008.
- Crom, Scott. 1972. "The Trusting Agnostic." Quaker Religious Thought. Vol. 14(2): 1–39. Includes two carefully thought out replies and Crom's response.
- Dawkins, Richard. 2002. An Atheist's Call to Arms. Accessed online video: July 17, 2007. Monterey, CA: Ted Talks.
- Dennett, Daniel. 2006. A Secular, Scientific Rebuttal to Pastor Rick Warren. Accessed online video: July 17, 2007. Monterey, CA: Ted Talks.
- Durham, Geoffrey. (ed.). (in Press – Sep 2010). The Spirit of the Quakers. (Contains a nontheistic Friends' perspective by Alpern, Robin). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Fager, Chuck. 2014. Remaking Friends: How Progressive Friends Changed Quakerism & Helped Save America. (A second volume provides the source documents he used in his study: Angels of Progress: The Documentary History of the Progressive Friends). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
- Hecht, Jennifer Michael. 2003. Doubt: A History: The Great Doubters and Their Legacy of Innovation from Socrates and Jesus to Thomas Jefferson and Emily Dickinson. Harper Collins.
- Jackson, Kenneth T. 2007. A Colony with a Conscience: This republic owes its enduring strength to a fragile, scorched and little-known document known as the Flushing Remonstrance. Dec. 27, 2007. Accessed online: December 27, 2007. New York: New York Times online.
- Miles, Jack. 1996. God: A Biography. Vintage.
- Myers, PZ. 2013. The Happy Atheist. Random House.
- Riemermann, James. 2006. What is a Nontheist? NontheistFriends.
org. Sep 20. Accessed online: July 17, 2007. - Rush, David 2002/3 They too are Quakers: A survey of 199 Nontheist Friends, The Woodbrooke Journal No. 11.
- Russell, Bertrand (E. Haldeman-Julius, ed.). 1927. On Why I Am Not a Christian: An Examination of the God-Idea and Christianity. Accessed online: July 17, 2007. Little Blue Book No. 1372.
- Muriel Seltman's books Bread and Roses and Rescuing God From Religion
- Spong, John Shelby. 1998. Why Christianity Must Change or Die: A Bishop Speaks to Believers In Exile. New York, NY: Harper One.
External links[edit]
- Official Website Of Nontheist Friends
- Nontheist Friends Network (a listed informal group of Britain Yearly Meeting)
- Nontheist Friends' wiki school at World University and School
--
- Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
- 415 480 4577
- CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
*
| Wed, Mar 17, 10:38 AM (5 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Hi Scott,
When you ask
Am curious how to add just this Google Group thread with so many good ideas about the idea of nontheist Friends to […]
do you mean how to find the URL for the thread? If so it’s this: https://groups.google.com/g/
Cheers,
Tim.
*
| Wed, Mar 17, 11:45 AM (5 days ago) | | ||
| ||||
Great, Tim, and thanks, - especially for the specific to this email thread link - https://groups.google.com/g/
When I looked yesterday, I found this https://groups.google.
"How can I cite a single Google group thread academically?"
I found -
" How do I cite a discussion post in APA?
When citing a discussion post in your reference list, include the author of the post, the date, the name of the discussion thread, and the course URL.
For example:
Smattering, L. (2014, February 28). Re: Academic Integrity [Discussion post]. Walden University Blackboard. https://class.waldenu.edu
Your in-text citation would follow the normal citation order: (Smattering, 2014).
https://academicanswers.
I found -
" How do I cite a discussion post in APA?
When citing a discussion post in your reference list, include the author of the post, the date, the name of the discussion thread, and the course URL.
For example:
Smattering, L. (2014, February 28). Re: Academic Integrity [Discussion post]. Walden University Blackboard. https://class.waldenu.edu
Your in-text citation would follow the normal citation order: (Smattering, 2014).
https://academicanswers.
Somewhat roughly, I might add the following reference to - https://wiki.
Nontheist Friends, and Scott MacLeod. 2021. [https://groups.google.com/g/
Thoughts, questions, ideas, suggestions? And thank you!
Friendly regards, and cheers, Scott
*
Tim, nontheist Friends, NOntheist Quakers, friends, Friends, All,
Am glad Tim in a Friendly manner emailed me on Wednesday regarding -
Hi Scott,
When you ask
Am curious how to add just this Google Group thread with so many good ideas about the idea of nontheist Friends to […]
do you mean how to find the URL for the thread? If so it’s this: https://groups.google.
Cheers,
Tim.
to which I replied -
Great, Tim, and thanks, - especially for the specific to this email thread link - https://groups.google.com/g/
When I looked yesterday, I found this https://groups.google.
"How can I cite a single Google group thread academically?"
I found -
" How do I cite a discussion post in APA?
When citing a discussion post in your reference list, include the author of the post, the date, the name of the discussion thread, and the course URL.
For example:
Smattering, L. (2014, February 28). Re: Academic Integrity [Discussion post]. Walden University Blackboard. https://class.
Your in-text citation would follow the normal citation order: (Smattering, 2014).
https://academicanswers.
I found -
" How do I cite a discussion post in APA?
When citing a discussion post in your reference list, include the author of the post, the date, the name of the discussion thread, and the course URL.
For example:
Smattering, L. (2014, February 28). Re: Academic Integrity [Discussion post]. Walden University Blackboard. https://class.
Your in-text citation would follow the normal citation order: (Smattering, 2014).
https://academicanswers.
Somewhat roughly, I might add the following reference to - https://wiki.
Nontheist Friends, and Scott MacLeod. 2021. [https://groups.google.com/g/
Thoughts, questions, ideas, suggestions? And thank you!
Friendly regards, and cheers, Scott
NtFs, I've just added all of you with -
Nontheist Friends, and Scott MacLeod. 2021. [https://groups.google.com/g/
in a new form of referencing to "Select Conversations / Dialogues ... " subject heading here
but not yet to Wikipedia's NtQ article (and I'm not editing Wikipedia). Any one want to try the Wikipedia citation tool, and add the above reference?
NtF cheers, Scott
PS
More about Jacques Lacan MD perhaps on Sunday - https://scott-macleod.
Jacques Lacan giving a lecture at The Catholic University of Louvain in 1972.
Planned in many languages ... (but building also from Lacan ... )
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldorado_National_Forest
...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.