Some of Terry's Philosophy
|All creative work on
this page and
on this web site
is copyrighted by
T. W. "Terry"
and all rights
|One of Terry's early
An oil painting called
"Black Sails in the Sunset"
circa approx. 1960
|Terrell William "Terry"
Proctor, J.D. as one
of the "Vital Speakers"
program at Holy Trinity
United Methodist Church
June 29, 2003
Here are 16 of the approximate 100 "Philosophical
from Terry's Book "MESSAGES OF THE MIND"
(which you can order on the GIFT SHOP page).
(following these quotations from the book, you will find
other philosophy which Terry has included on this page.
You don't have to agree, but we hope it will provoke your thoughts)
Well that is all the freebies. However, if you enjoyed these bits of "wisdom?"or found them useful, then please visit our GIFT SHOP page. I hope you too have a philosophy in life. It certainly makes living easier and more enjoyable, as well as making life a little better understood and more satisfying.
Thank you. "Terry" Proctor.
This is, perhaps, the most intimate page to visitors, on the TERRYCO website. If you are interested, read on. If not return to something lighter and less controversial possibly.
We are used to hearing the philosophy of such people as Plato, Aristotle, the Pope, Charles Darwin, Sir Francis Bacon, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, President Lincoln and hundreds or thousands of other leading figures in the history of mankind.
However, it is my belief that the philosophy of the man who worked fields in Greece at the time of Plato and Aristotle were as entitled to their own philosophy as were these learned men of history. The humble Priest who attempted to bring Christ to the American Indians is as entitled to his philosophy as was the Pope at that time. The artisans who created works of art were as entitled to their philosophy as was Sir France Bacon. The men who left their wives and children to die for the American Revolution may well have had as noble a philosophy as did Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine. The female slave of a landholder may well have had a philosophy of life as important as Abraham Lincoln.
In short, what I'm saying is that, fame and renown have little to do with what each of us thinks of life, other than the fact that some folks, because of the station in life they achieve or fall heir to, have their "philosophy" made better known.
Thankfully, in this day of the internet and the relative inexpensive manner of putting our thoughts onto a web site for millions of people to have a chance to see our thoughts (of course search engines certainly help to determine if this becomes a reality or not).
I took my collected thoughts, poems, paintings, and a new art form I have developed called eART SCANNING which you undoubtedly have already had a chance to view on this website, and put some of this together into a book which I called "MESSAGES OF THE MIND". I self-published a rather limited number of copies back in 2000.
In the book, "MESSAGES OF THE MIND", I printed copies of most of my then about 40+ poems, a few of my new eART SCANS, and a number of my approx. 100 Pen & Ink Drawings. Then I included about 100 of my philosophical thoughts.
It is difficult, to put into a few words, a philosophical thought. However, if folks may want to read and learn that philosophical thought, then the KISS principle has to apply (Keep It Simple Stupid). As an attorney, I have to fight against saying something in 500 words which thought could be communicated in 50 words or less.
I love to debate deep, thought-provoking matters. Most folks believe you should steer away from certain subjects, such as politics, death, religion, race and a few other things which are considered to be inflammatory or create arguments. I don't buy that position. I think most of us enjoy getting into the guts of why we are here, on this planet, at this time, in this country, and in the body we came in.
Is if important to talk about such things? I think so. If mankind (the generic term which includes womankind as well) had not had such thoughts, then human speech would probably not have arisen. After all, most of our fellow inhabitants on this globe get by pretty well with a few grunts, shrieks, coos and other non-speech communications. Why did we start talking?
I think it was because we had something to say. Our original ancestors could have pointed in a direction, pointed to the mouth, rubbed their stomach and communicated that they knew where food was. Certainly a scream and a pointing could tell about some predator which was about to grab a member of the troop. Look at Meerkats (Suricata suricatta) in Africa and Prairie Dogs in the Western U.S., as only a couple of thousands of examples. They post sentries to sound the alarm. Their communication noises are only minimal and sometimes, they, like human speech are inadequate to prevent tragedy.
I fully subscribe to "evolution" (although I think we still have a lot to learn fully about just how it works) and do not believe in "sudden creation" HOWEVER, I do believe in GOD and I believe that Christ did come to Earth as GOD made manifest as a human, to show his love to us, even into letting some of we humans physically kill the man, to provide that we may all live past the pall of death.
I think that "sudden creationists" are as wrong in what they teach as were those who taught that the Earth was flat; that you could sail off the edge of the ocean; that man could never leave the Earth and go to another planet; and many other things now clearly shown by science to be wrong.
However, one cannot really be an atheist, even though they try to convince us that they are. Perhaps some can (unwisely in my opinion) be agnostics. Before I provide you with some of the philosophical thoughts from "MESSAGES OF THE MIND" think with me for a moment about some things, which would prevent anyone from actually being an atheist.
Think on these thoughts, and then tell me how anyone can actually be an atheist.
The list could go on ad infinitum. The simple answer has to be that God did create the Universe; that God did create humans as different from all other life forms on Earth; that God gave us a purpose, the most important was to recognize this force called GOD; to be part of the creation. Is their life after death. People of virtually all the World's Great Religions have always thought so. Peoples who never came in contact with one another and whose religions and lives vary so much that they hardly can be recognized as having much in common, have one thing in common. They believe that the "soul" lives after the physical body dies.
I have never really debated an atheist. I have met a number of people who tell me that they are an "agnostic". An agnostics they explain is someone who believes in some greater force (that means GOD) but they don't buy into any given religion.
That is a starting point for enlightenment. The question to any "agnostic" should be something like this: "Okay, if you recognize a greater force than humans, and you don't believe that the Universe just created itself, then where do you start, to understand what this force is, if not by studying various religions.
I consider my self an "evolutionist" but a person who attends church virtually every week, has held almost every office in church, regularly donate a tithe (or more) to the church, and pray for others who are in need of consolation, assistance, and prayer.
I do not find this embarrassing, demeaning, or frivolous. I feel that people who are regular church goers, for the most part, live much happier lives than those who don't. I find that people in church ARE willing to help less fortunate folks and also to be available to console, give aid, and help others, both in and out of their church. This is true whether a person is a Protestant, Catholic or belong to other recognized religious organizations.
Are there those who "use religion" for their own use and benefit? You bet there are. There is nothing wrong with personally seeking out someone in business or profession, whom you respect because they do give of themselves to their church, community and other people. However, those who seek to solicit business from others, because such person professes to be a "fellow member" I find are often insincere and are only seeking to gain financially from such contact. Unfortunately, many of our politicians use religion to publicly profess from pulpits, beliefs that they don't exhibit in day to day life. As a person who has run for office, I have seen so much of this hypocrisy.
If we were to look at religion, not because of what is in our hearts, but strictly from cultural, community, economic and other considerations, we would have to determine that religion generally pays off big for society.
Are there abuses. Of course. We can go back in history where Christians have professed to be acting in the name of Jesus and proceeded to slay non-believers instead of trying to win them the way that Christ taught his followers to win others. We certainly see misguided or evil members of the Islamic faith today, creating a horrible impression of many people as to the real tenants of the Muslim religion with perverted teachings that have no actual basis in either the holy Koran or the long time teachings and beliefs of the true followers of the Faith. Even Hitler on occasion attempted to give legitimacy to his evil regime in the name of Christianity.
I have seen many examples in my lifetime, of people using Christianity in a very evil and perverted way, to do just the opposite of the teachings of Christ. Think of the Reverend Jim Jones & The People's Temple in Guana, South America. Jim Jones, the son of a Klansman, who considered himself the reincarnation of both Jesus and Lenin. On November 18, 1978, Jim Jones had Congressman Leo Ryan and his party who had come to Guana (to investigate claims by some in the U.S. that their family members were being held against their Will in Jonestown) murdered, then had his 900 members drink Kool Aid which was laced with cyanide and tranquilizers, with a few shot who would not do so.
Don't forget February 28, 1993, when David Koresh & 90 ATF agents had their incident at the Branch Davidian compound in the outskirts of Waco, Texas. David Koresh was also a melomaniac who considered himself .
We can also recall the Order of the Solar Temple (69 members). This international apocalyptical cult claimed 69 victims in a bizarre mass suicide rituals. On October 5, 1994, 53 people simultaneously committed suicide, primarily in Canada and in several chalets in Switzerland. Most of the sect members appeared to be well educated and well-to-do persons. The Order arose or had some roots in the Knights of Templar, a secretive medieval organization founded by French crusaders in Jerusalem, many centuries ago. It is unknown how this Order became a New Age Euro-Yuppie organization, which espoused suicide and resulted in so many deaths by intelligent people.
You may recall some of the news in March, 1995, about Shoko Asahara & Aum Supreme Truth (18+) where what is called an apocalyptic Sect and its charismatic leader were suspected of releasing Sarin, which is a type of nerve gas which was developed by the Nazis during WWII. The gas was released, during peak morning hours, in several Tokyo subway stations. The attack killed 11 people and more than 5,500 others became ill, some very ill. This religious cult is also suspected of a similar type of gas attack which killed seven people in June, 1994, in the city of Matsumoto, Japan. The Cult is also suspected of a series of slayings and kidnappings of anti-cult activist.
We cannot forget another melomaniac, Charles Manson, and his his tribe of faithful followers, who murdered Susan Tate and others and which Charles hoped would start a race war, so that he could take over. He considered himself to be Christ also.
The list could go on. We have seen the killings by Stalin, by Hitler, by Pol Pot, by Idi Amin, and most recently by Saddam Hussein, professing to be a good Muslim. And don't forget the crusades, as noble as they have been portrayed, which apparently were as much concerned, at least by some, as a gain of wealth and power as advancing true Christianity. The attempt to force Christianity upon others was and is as wrong as is the attempt by today's terrorists to purportedly force Islam on the world by terror and force.
So do bad leaders, who profess to be religious, make religion bad? Of course not. Neither do bad political leaders make politics bad and a need to end all politics. The solution would be a monarchy, dictatorship, or anarchy. We have to deal with bad religious leaders, just as we have to deal with bad politicians and keep the good while bringing to an end the bad.
The next area is fanatics and so-called fundamentalists. I personally resent the term fundamentalist, because I consider myself to be a fundamentalist, i.e. I believe in the fundamental essentials. Many who call themselves "fundamentalists" are actually fanatics who have tied onto the fundamentals, a lot of baggage which isn't part of the fundamental.
Sudden creation is a good example. Archbishop Usher concluded that the Earth was created about 4,000 years before the Christian era began. Of course other religions have their own concepts of when religion began and several do not preach any creation of the Earth.
If folks want to believe things which the Bible does not say and which scientific facts prove are wrong, then they are certainly welcome to do so. However, since science is not a religion and religion is not a science, it is not only illogical but damaging for those who hold one religious belief to attempt to foist their religious beliefs upon the children of other parents, under the guise of a "second science".
The main premise of science is that nothing is ever conclusively proven. Todays scientific fact becomes tomorrow's disproved theory or at least not the best or current theory in each area of science. On the contrary, religion is an accepted dogma, doctrine or belief which those of us who are religious have, which is immutable and not subject to changes in time. God created the heavens and the Earth. That is an immutable belief which Jews, Christians and Muslims at least agree upon as well as some other religions. However, the means by which he did this is not is not crystal clear, as some would have us believe.
There is nothing inconsistent that I have ever seen between scientific theories and my belief in God and Christ. Because, fortunately, our U.S. Constitution, does not permit any religion to be "taught" in schools, means I don't have to worry about my grandchildren being taught to believe in the "voodoo" religion of some of the islands, the various Hindu gods, or other religions which I do not subscribe to.
Ah, the "sudden creationists" say, but you are teaching a "secular religion" called science. This is absurd. As stated above, science is always open to challenge by other "scientific" thoughts, theories and testing. Religion is never subject to "scientific" thoughts, theories and testing, nor should it be. We take religion on "faith" not on any type of proof.
While there are certainly arguments by a few about the correctness of certain scientific tests on age, there is not much disagreement that the Earth is billions of years old, not 6,000 years old; that by some process things do change over long periods of time, although some species change dramatically, others make very little change over time. As testing becomes more and more accurate, they tend to prove and refine prior scientific conclusions, not disprove them.
The bottom line is that science and religion are not implacable foes, but science has done much in recent years to prove things about the Bible and the events, although not all.
We must consider that in the long history of the Earth and the chances of anything being fossilized and preserved to be later found is highly unlikely. Therefore, it is not strange that there are missing links. Indeed, it is amazing that there are so many connecting links.
Science classes do not teach any child that there is or is not a God. That is not their job. The job of natural science classes is to train children in how to start the path toward being a doctor, petroleum geologist, space scientist, biologist to produce more and better food for the Earth's expanding population, archaeologists to help find Bible locations, facts and artifacts, as well as many other such things; Paleontologists to continue the pursuit of finding and identifying creatures which are now part of the fossil record; and scientists to become engineers for better homes, buildings, vehicles and on and on and on. This is hardly training for any religious activities to be in conflict with Christianity or any other religion.
The claims that science is something which atheists are trying to foist upon "fundamental" Christians, if such claims were not so stridently made and becoming more and more of a cacophony in our times.
No the Earth is not flat; Yes humans have gone to the Moon; No one cannot sail off the edge of the ocean; No science is not a religion competing with Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Jainism or any other form of religion; and No religion is not a science and has no place being taught as an alternative to science in our public schools.
O.K. If you disagree with my position, that is good. That is what "freedom" and "democracy" are all about. That is also why neither of us, or none of us, should attempt to impose our religious beliefs upon each other, through the use of public schools.
I do hope that you use your own parental, grandparental, aunt or uncle, or sibling influence to mold the minds of children in the manner which is in their best interests, which includes religious training of moral and spiritual values, without warping children so that they will have a more difficult time coping in society. Open-mindedness is good. Entrenched dogma, which has nothing to do with the "fundamentals" of one's religious beliefs, but which places a child in a life-long conflict with non-essential differences with the majority of scientific proof (at least present proof, subject to the continuing search of science for better ways and closer analysis)is not good.
Bottom line: Let's keep science science and religion religion AND let's see them as cooperative things in our life, not as conflicts. We can then spend our time on learning more how to love each other; live closer to the way we should live our lives, morally, spiritually and helpfully to our fellow humans, in the manner which we learned as children.
I hope this will add some page will add some meaning to your life and help you think on these things. It is not my intention to demean anyone for their beliefs, but to express my beliefs for others to consider.
Terrell William "Terry" Proctor, J.D.