“The Bible study group met weekly. Each participant had a copy of a well known Bible study guide in which a particular book of the Bible was broken down into sections. Each section had a series of questions to which the participants could answer according as they understood a passage of scripture as it had been read by a member of the group. Durwin felt, and rightly so I would say, that his role in the group would be to intersperse the comments of the members with views presented by various biblical scholars and Bible commentaries on the scripture at hand. In this manner, participants wouldn’t be limited to their own thoughts on a matter, but would have the expertise of the scholars to enrich and nurture their own views.
“The Bible commentaries used for this purpose would be writings easily understandable by the average lay person. In fact some of them were written expressly for lay people. Also Durwin’s presentation of them would be easily understandable as were all his sermons.
“So a passage of Scripture was read and the discussion on it began. Durwin remained silent until the participants had ample time to express their views which in general were good and worthy. Then Durwin mentioned how one world renowned biblical scholar, calling him by name said such and such of that passage. The participant who had been so upset by the Monday as day off discussion came on angrily and restated what he had previously said of the passage, cutting Durwin down to silence. The man’s wife looked at her husband in a hurt manner, calling him by name in a tone meant to bring him to discipline. He stuck to his position, repeated his statement on the passage again, perturbedly, to assert his statement. His wife was visibly upset and shaken.
“Durwin responded softly and as tactfully as possible. ‘We will find, as we do Bible study, that there are different interpretations for many Bible passages, and what makes Bible study so interesting is that we can discuss these various interpretations and come to our own conclusions about them. That is what protestant Christian theology refers to as having the freedom to work out one’s own salvation in Jesus Christ. One person may interpret a saying or incident concerning Jesus one way, and another person may interpret it another way. Both have the freedom to do that.
“A derogatory snort came from another man across the room. ‘Ugh,’ he snorted loudly in contempt as he glared at Durwin. The man who started it all also sat glaring with piercing eyes at Durwin. Durwin glanced around the room quickly and noticed that several other men and women were doing the same thing.
“The first man’s wife was near tears. I’ll read the next passage of Scripture,’ she volunteered in an effort to save the situation. So she read, and then referred to the first question in the guide to initiate discussion. But no discussion came. Durwin waited and waited, trying his best to avoid a repetition of the previous scene. They all remained silent.
“Durwin reasoned that perhaps, perhaps I say, since this is a difficult passage, it may be safe for him to speak. He put forward the views of two different scholars on the Scripture passage. The others made no comment on the topic at all. Apparently, since it was a difficult passage they were not willing to venture an opinion on it. So Durwin made a contrast and comparison between the views of the two Biblical scholars he had quoted.
“After that, Durwin decided to take a different approach. He would present the views of the biblical scholars on the topic at hand before the participants presented any of their views. Perhaps, he thought again, they felt inferior to the biblical scholars in comparison to their own views, even though, in Durwin’s opinion they did present worthy views. And by presenting the views of the biblical scholars first, they then need not present any personal views that they would feel sensitive about in comparison to the scholars.
“So Durwin tried this. Immediately after the reading of the Scripture passage, he began to present the views of the scholars and the commentaries. As he did so, he was twice angrily cut down with different views by the man who had started the trouble in the first place. Durwin knew now, that the problem did not lie in how the presentations were made. The man who started the trouble, as well as several others in the group had a problem with Durwin. He was too good for them. They couldn’t stand him to have or express any opinions that were different from theirs. From then on, by inference they branded him as a know-it-all-smart-aleck.
“The name ‘smart aleck’ has connotations of such things as conceit, offensive assertion of oneself, cockiness. Durwin was anything but. He was a humble, self examining type of person, intelligent, but well charactered; smart, but not smart aleck. He very cautiously and sparingly used his intellect in dealing with others. The defamation of Durwin Lawton, and his highly intelligent wife Canda, had begun. It had begun in, of all places, a Bible study group.
“This Bible study group went on for several months, similar as I have described it; continuously tense, hostile and frigid. A recess for the Christmas season finally broke it up. It did not come back together after the holiday season. Of course, Durwin would be blamed for that.
“There you have a picture of the kind of people Durwin was dealing with and these were all well to do middle class people, well educated to varying degrees.”
“How childish,” said Gilda, “spoiled brats.”
“Babies,” quipped Leo.
“Hollow pride,” commented Donna.
“Sick,” said Albin, “and extremely over-sensitive.”
“They certainly didn’t know how to respond to a higher intelligence or authority than their own, did they?” remarked Brett.
“Not in the least,” responded Collin, “neither to the expertise of their trained minister, nor to the sound and widely accepted knowledge of the biblical scholars and their commentaries.
“A very notable aspect of this is their complete lack of knowledge and ability on how to interact with someone they perceived to be smarter or superior in some way to themselves. Of course that is somewhat of a problem for lots of people. As for these belittlers they were completely at a loss on the matter. It would be so simple for people like you and I.”
“It’s their problem, isn’t it?” remarked Leo, “their shortcoming.”
“Yes,” responded Collin, “it is the mind-set they grew in, and their minds haven’t budged on it since childhood. They learned, or more accurately, automatically took on from their parents, peers and a large portion of society, the distasteful characteristic of hating and being prejudiced against what is commonly referred to in their language as ‘big shots’ and ‘smart alecks.’ They are just that way automatically since childhood. They give no thought to the fact that they, in this era of education and opportunity for all people, are better off than many of the types of people they had learned to scorn when they were children and which they still scorn now.
“Again, it is worth noting,” continued Collin, “that most of the people they label big shots and smart alecks are people whom you and I see as successful people. True, there are many seemingly successful, yet arrogant and otherwise questionable characters out there whom we would not endorse. But these people are not the ones the belittlers go after. Its the better quality people they like to bring down.”
Brett quipped, “Especially if they have been successful in business.”
“Why in business?” asked Albin.
“That’s easy, Albin,” answered Brett, “belittlers like to bring down anyone in any occupation if they perceive them to be superior in certain ways. But my opinion is they come down harder on fine people who are successful in business. You will hear them say or imply that making money is wrong. Again, it is my opinion many of them say that because they haven’t been successful at making money themselves, and they envy those who have. So they label us as bad guys, crooks, etc. but you should see how they go after money when the opportunity arises.”
After