Fundamentalism and Intellectualism

redwards · #**151** 6th July 2009, 12:52 AM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Oh, I would have to most strenuously disagree.

If a school taught Christian Theology during 3rd period, I'm sure people would be up in arms.

I think what you're alluding to is teaching Christian Theology under the aegis of Mythology 101.

On the contrary, I can think of no more efficient way to create atheists than to teach the bible. I would, however, probably want equal time for Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism. I think a good world religions class is remarkably enlightening.

Nathan Poe · #**152** 6th July 2009, 02:32 AM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Oh, I would have to most strenuously disagree.

Not surprised.

If a school taught Christian Theology during 3rd period, I'm sure people would be up in arms.

Funny -- every school I've ever been to -- both as a student and as a teacher -- taught Christian Theology (some of them probably even did teach it 3rd period) and nobody blinked.

I think what you're alluding to is teaching Christian Theology under the aegis of Mythology 101.

IMHO, its proper place alongside all the other theologies.

corvus_corax · #**153** 6th July 2009, 04:04 AM

Originally Posted by redwards

No, Christians get angry when you ask questions.

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Awww --- they do, huh?

Some of them do , yes.
Please read the previous sentence carefully.

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

And that stops you guys from wanting Christian Theology out of our schools

Absolutely not. It's the angry, dogmatic Christians that want this taught as science in the science classroom. "We" just want them to keep their non-scientific beliefs in the proper context (and even you agree that Creationism should not be taught in the science classroom)

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

while simultaneously spending hours on the Internet asking question after question?

It's just fun, really, at least for me

Your personal beliefs (as much as I might rail against them online) dont mean jack to me ("your personal interpretation of the bible can take a hike"). However, I'll admit that it's as much fun debating here as it was on pagan website that I used to manage

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

What would you think if I wanted Evolution Doctrine out of the schools (which I do), yet spent hours online asking question after question?

I'd gladly invite you to ask question after question.

I'd expect a higher standard from you of course, but I'd still invite questions (and I think most on this board would welcome the same)

Catherineanne · #**154** 6th July 2009, 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by iremouth

So at which point does the bible start to become believable for you? and why would you even begin to think there was a God? where did that idea come from?

The Bible can never become literal truth, because the concept of literal truth in relation to holy writing is an anachronism. It simply does not fit.

The Bible is believable for what it is, not for what it is not, and was never intended to be.

Why would I begin to think there was a God? Why do you think that accepting the Bible for what it is, rather than what it is not, entails rejecting what it says? What I am doing is accepting the Bible for what it actually claims to be, and believing what it says as it was intended to be believed.

Which has nothing to do with fact, but everything to do with spirituality. Who cares whether the Lord was crucified on Thursday or Friday; the gospels claim both, and if the Bible is 100% true, then he died twice. The important part is that it happened, not that the actual day was confused.

Every single Christian on earth behaves like this, in fact. It is just that some are honest about it, and some are rather more in denial. But we all do it.

Catherineanne · #**155** 6th July 2009, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by Bombila

But then, very few Canadians have the faintest interest in having creationism taught in schools or in having evolution based biology not taught in schools. There's no broad ideological battlefront here.

This is true of the UK as well. Apart from a few fringe elements, most people are more than happy to accept that there is a difference between faith and science, and that the two should not overlap in schools.

Catherineanne · #**156** 6th July 2009, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Awww --- they do, huh?

And that stops you guys from wanting Christian Theology out of our schools, while simultaneously spending hours on the Internet asking question after question?

What would you think if I wanted Evolution Doctrine out of the schools (which I do), yet spent hours online asking question after question?

Creationism is not Christian Theology. It is fantasy. The belief in literalism is not sanctioned in Scripture, nor is its portrayal of God as a deceiver any part of Christianity.

Believe what you like, but don't think for one moment that such belief has anything to do with our faith, as it has stood for 2000 years. Creationism is a new faith, and brings with it a whole new man made gospel.

AV1611VET · #**157** 6th July 2009, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by redwards

On the contrary, I can think of no more efficient way to create atheists than to teach the bible.

Nor can I.

Originally Posted by redwards

I would, however, probably want equal time for Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism.

Cool --- with enough funding, you could go on field trips to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and India respectively.

Or maybe become an exchange student?

Originally Posted by redwards

I think a good world religions class is remarkably enlightening.

See that? It's working already!

No better way to cure that atheism, is there?

AV1611VET · #**158** 6th July 2009, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

The belief in literalism is not sanctioned in Scripture...

Then why did Jesus and all the writers of the individual books of the Bible take the Word of God literally?

Catherineanne · #**159** 6th July 2009, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Then why did Jesus and all the writers of the individual books of the Bible take the Word of God literally?

They didn't. And neither do you, unless you are wandering around having cut off your right hand and gouged out your eyes for sinning.

Any person who believed and carried out 100% what the Bible says would very soon end up in either prison or psychiatric hospital, with no option for parole.

Scripture says nothing whatever about literality. This is an anachronistic interpretation, and has no place in Biblical exegesis.

AV1611VET · #**160** 6th July 2009, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

They didn't. And neither do you, unless you are wandering around having cut off your right hand and gouged out your eyes for sinning.

Any person who believed and carried out 100% what the Bible says would very soon end up in either prison or psychiatric hospital, with no option for parole.

Scripture says nothing whatever about literality. This is an anachronistic interpretation, and has no place in Biblical exegesis.

Where did you come up with 100%?

Even the Bible's best critics admit It has some literal truth in It.

As J Dwight Pentecost puts it (or maybe it was Gail A Riplinger):

The Bible contains allegory --- this does not mean the Bible is allegory.