 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6885
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Yeah, but you said "Christianity". If you are speaking of a version of some religion, the you could. But you did specify "Christianity".
Did you miss where I said this:
| Quote: | | Oh, by the way - don't respond with all the nonsense the world has to say about Christianity and all the religions out there that call themselves 'christian'. I'm speaking strictly from a scriptural and relational point of view, and none of what the guy down the street says makes a bit of difference in this respect - unless that guy down the street was the Christ... |
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 7554
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | Yeah, but you said "Christianity". If you are speaking of a version of some religion, the you could. But you did specify "Christianity".
|
Ok, put it this way: should teachers lead prayers in class? If so, you can bet your bottom dollar that it's only a matter of time until some Muslim teacher is hired and wants to lead Muslim prayers.
I assert that
a) It's much better to keep this can of worms closed, especially because
b) It should be a parent's job to teach religion to their kids, and nobody who is serious about the nurturing of their children's souls should entrust that duty to a government employee.
Is what I am saying unreasonable?
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6064
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | Yeah, but you said "Christianity". If you are speaking of a version of some religion, the you could. But you did specify "Christianity".
Did you miss where I said this:
| Quote: | | Oh, by the way - don't respond with all the nonsense the world has to say about Christianity and all the religions out there that call themselves 'christian'. I'm speaking strictly from a scriptural and relational point of view, and none of what the guy down the street says makes a bit of difference in this respect - unless that guy down the street was the Christ... |
|
And as I said, I could teach a version of Christianity that you would not agree with.
Just because you refuse to believe that anything can be Christianity that isn't what you believe already doesn't make a religion based entirely upon the Bible and nearly identical to what you already believe except for a few extremely distasteful points supported by the Bible does not make that different version not Christianity.
For example, merely teaching that the commands in Matthew 5:29 and 30 are literal and otherwise remaining identical to whatever version of Christianity you adhere to would, I suspect, be extremely undesirable.
You can clamor on and on about how there aren't "versions" of Christianity, but there distinctly are or at least can be.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6885
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I understand FFT, you make a claim that is supported only by your choice of definition and yet try to apply that claim to me or others...  You say you can teach a version of Christianity that I would not like, I define what Christianity is and that you could not teach that which is impossible, and you ignore what is considered Christianity and stand by your claim? You make little or no sense.
| Quote: |
You can clamor on and on about how there aren't "versions" of Christianity, but there distinctly are or at least can be. |
Not so. Scriptue is pretty darn clear on what a Christian is, there can be no 'versions' on the adopted heir to the Glory of God, you are either one or you are not one.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 7554
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | Scriptue is pretty darn clear on what a Christian is, there can be no 'versions' on the adopted heir to the Glory of God, you are either one or you are not one. |
Sure, but some types of Christians such as Catholics don't even recognize scripture as being the definitive word on most issues. They have all of this 'church doctrine' stuff.
So you might be right, but it really doesn't matter since there are plenty of Christians out there who don't agree with your definition.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6064
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | I understand FFT, you make a claim that is supported only by your choice of definition and yet try to apply that claim to me or others... You say you can teach a version of Christianity that I would not like, I define what Christianity is and that you could not teach that which is impossible, and you ignore what is considered Christianity and stand by your claim? You make little or no sense. |
I'm sorry, you're simply failing to understand what I'm saying.
I could teach exactly what you think Christianity is with one small addition: that the commands Jesus Himself gives in Matthew 5:29 and 30 are literal commands that Christians must obey. You have defined Christianity as being scriptural, and this is scripture.
Would it or would it not be Christianity, in your opinion?
Would it or would it not be distasteful?
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 7554
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Whats' the difference between these verses when taken literally and figuratively?
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6885
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P123 wrote: | | Ok, put it this way: should teachers lead prayers in class? If so, you can bet your bottom dollar that it's only a matter of time until some Muslim teacher is hired and wants to lead Muslim prayers. |
The question was 'Should Public Schools Teach Religion?" what you are talking about is 'practicing' religion. A different animal altogether.
FFT:
I don't know what to tell you, you obviously do not understand or are intentionally sidestepping what I've said, so what is the point?
| Quote: |
I could teach exactly what you think Christianity is with one small addition: that the commands Jesus Himself gives in Matthew 5:29 and 30 are literal commands that Christians must obey. You have defined Christianity as being scriptural, and this is scripture. |
Have at it. I doubt even you could do enough gymnatics to make any sense out of a 'literal' interpretation of this:
Mat 5:29 If your right eye serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, pluck it out and throw it away. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be cast into hell (Gehenna).
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your entire body should be cast into hell (Gehenna).
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 7554
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | The question was 'Should Public Schools Teach Religion?" what you are talking about is 'practicing' religion. A different animal altogether. |
Yes, I have since realized that I should be more specific. What I really meant to ask is whether or not teachers should be leading prayers in class, indoctrinating the children into a certain religion, using holy books as textbooks, teaching religious morals, etc.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6064
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | I don't know what to tell you, you obviously do not understand or are intentionally sidestepping what I've said, so what is the point? |
I'm intentionally sidestepping what you've said because it's irrelevant. You're claiming that what I'm offering somehow "isn't Christianity" when it's just as scriptural as whatever you'd choose to throw out there, because in this hypothetical I clarified that it was exactly the same as whatever you want only with the teaching that Matthew 5:29 and 30 are literal commands that must be followed. You've defined Christianity as "scriptural," here's some scripture for you.
| RevJP wrote: | Have at it. I doubt even you could do enough gymnatics to make any sense out of a 'literal' interpretation of this:
Mat 5:29 If your right eye serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, pluck it out and throw it away. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be cast into hell (Gehenna).
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your entire body should be cast into hell (Gehenna). |
I'm sorry, how is this hard to understand? If your eye happens upon juicy womanflesh (or manflesh if you're into that sort of thing), you have to remove it. If your hand just happens to do something a bit "dirty," off it goes. I mean, it's better that then let them guide you into hell, right?
It would be morbidly humorous to teach a literal interpretation in high school, when hands and eyes are especially liable to offend.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sofyst
Tiger
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 830
Location: Tejas
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would say that yes, public school should teach religion. I don't think they should necessarily teach how to pray or how to perform certain rites, but rather how Christians (or muslims, or buddhist) pray and how they perform certain rites.
I think that it should be a philosophy type class that is taught.
_________________
simul justus et peccator
the Protestant pub |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ana
King of the Jungle
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think they should teach religion in school, but I do think they should teach about religion in school (it's a fairly big phenomenon worldwide - perhaps our kids should see what's going on out there?). I think a survey unit in a humanities class or a social studies class would be appropriate, if taught as objectively as possible.
_________________
Truth doesn't care about theology, and theology doesn't care about truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sofyst
Tiger
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 830
Location: Tejas
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ana wrote: | | I don't think they should teach religion in school, but I do think they should teach about religion in school (it's a fairly big phenomenon worldwide - perhaps our kids should see what's going on out there?). I think a survey unit in a humanities class or a social studies class would be appropriate, if taught as objectively as possible. |
I think that this is my opinion as well. I think that the goal of education is to educate, not doctrinate.
This is why I don't necessarily think they should teach evolution. Until evolution becomes as widely accepted and as undisputed as the belief that the Sun is the center of our galaxy or that water is composed of H2O, I don't think it should be taught as fact, but rather as theory.
Give all the opposing arguments on everything, perhaps the teachers can give their opinions on it, but the children should not be forced to accept any as fact that is not considered fact by all.
_________________
simul justus et peccator
the Protestant pub |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 7554
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sofyst wrote: |
This is why I don't necessarily think they should teach evolution. Until evolution becomes as widely accepted and as undisputed as the belief that the Sun is the center of our galaxy or that water is composed of H2O, I don't think it should be taught as fact, but rather as theory.
|
Do you realize that evolution became widely-accepted as undisputed by the mainstream scientific community something like 100 years ago? Furthermore, since this is an issue of science, the scientific community is the only community whose opinion matters.
It really doesn't matter if the international league of bread bakers or car mechanics objects to evolution; they are not qualified to judge whether or not it is true.
Evolution is fact, and virtually everyone in the scientific community agrees. There is no credible dissent on the subject. It really is as accepted by scientists as the heliocentric view of the solar system.
| sofyst wrote: |
Give all the opposing arguments on everything, perhaps the teachers can give their opinions on it, but the children should not be forced to accept any as fact that is not considered fact by all. |
First of all, evolution IS considered fact by virtually all people whose opinions on the subject matter (scientists). But secondly, children are not adults. They are not yet equipped with the reasoning powers that are needed to discern between fact and fiction. It makes a whole lot more sense to TEACH them what is true and what is false rather than just throwing a bunch of ideas at them and letting them figure it out.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sofyst
Tiger
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 830
Location: Tejas
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P123 wrote: | Do you realize that evolution became widely-accepted as undisputed by the mainstream scientific community something like 100 years ago? Furthermore, since this is an issue of science, the scientific community is the only community whose opinion matters.
It really doesn't matter if the international league of bread bakers or car mechanics objects to evolution; they are not qualified to judge whether or not it is true.
Evolution is fact, and virtually everyone in the scientific community agrees. There is no credible dissent on the subject. It really is as accepted by scientists as the heliocentric view of the solar system. |
I disagree. Not all who hold to the creation theory are wacko un-educated Christians.
| Quote: | | First of all, evolution IS considered fact by virtually all people whose opinions on the subject matter (scientists). But secondly, children are not adults. They are not yet equipped with the reasoning powers that are needed to discern between fact and fiction. It makes a whole lot more sense to TEACH them what is true and what is false rather than just throwing a bunch of ideas at them and letting them figure it out. |
Again, not all the Scientific community believe in evolution, some hold to another theory.
Secondly, the 'Scientific community', and 'virtually all people whose opinions on the subject matter (scientist)' believed that 'letting blood' helped to relieve a person of an illness.
Science evolves itself; scientist are not perfect (even if the mass of them agree on one issue).
And I'm thinking about the argument of them not being able to reason, or not having the reasoning powers that adults have...hmmmm....
_________________
simul justus et peccator
the Protestant pub |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
