Sacred Academia

[AV1611VET]

This question is for those of you who stand behind your college degrees to spout Antichristian and Antijewish rhetoric in the name of science:

If you went to a college or university that has a Hebrew or Christian heritage, did it bother you?

 

[Loudmouth]

If you went to a college or university that has a Hebrew or Christian heritage, did it bother you?

I went to a college with a Presbyterian heritage, and it did not bother me. I was even required to take religious courses which also did not bother me.

More importantly, my christian professors, who were mostly Methodists for whatever reason, didn't have a problem with no global flood, an old Earth, and evolution.

 

[AV1611VET]

More importantly, my christian professors, who were mostly Methodists for whatever reason,

No comment.

 

[Loudmouth]

No comment.

Does it bother you that universities with a christian heritage teach evolution, an old earth, and no flood?

 

[florida2]

This question is for those of you who stand behind your college degrees to spout Antichristian and Antijewish rhetoric in the name of science:

Just a teensy bit of an inferiority complex you've got there, AV

 

[AV1611VET]

Does it bother you that universities with a christian heritage teach evolution, an old earth, and no flood?

Yes and no.

Our universities are a shell of what they used to be.

The wheat has long since been overrun by the tares.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes and no.

Our universities are a shell of what they used to be.

The wheat has long since been overrun by the tares.

How do you figure?

 

[AV1611VET]

Just a teensy bit of an inferiority complex you've got there, AV

Well, I don't measure up to my Saviour; and I don't measure up to the likes of Charles Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, R.A. Torrey, Praying Hyde, Lester Roloff, Bob Jones, Billy Sunday, or George Whitefield ... but other than that, I'm okay.

 

[AV1611VET]

How do you figure?

The world has crept in, mainly in the form of evolution and scientism.

Psychoheresy: n., the intrusion of worldly philosophies into the Church.

 

[Loudmouth]

The world has crept in, mainly in the form of evolution and scientism.

Why is it bad for universities to teach science?

Psychoheresy: n., the intrusion of worldly philosophies into the Church.

We aren't talking about the church. We are talking about universities.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

Yes and no.

Our universities are a shell of what they used to be.

The wheat has long since been overrun by the tares.

I bet you have almost zero standing to make that claim.

You lambaste atheists for not appreciating the judeo christian backgrounds to their schools? I challenge you to pony up your experience with advanced degrees and university life.

How far did YOU go?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

This question is for those of you who stand behind your college degrees to spout Antichristian and Antijewish rhetoric in the name of science:

If you went to a college or university that has a Hebrew or Christian heritage, did it bother you?

Mine had neither, but it certainly wouldn't have bothered me if it had. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Most of those that claim to follow what they are today claiming as science, have so much Fairie Dust in their cosmology it should be embarrassing to them. Not that science may get things wrong now and then, that's part of life. But that when the data and observation contradict theory, they never question the base assumptions. Instead they just add another undetectable and unfalsifiable entity and pronounce the magic words, "According to General Relativity..." Abracadabra does about the same effect to it.

Yes, GR is an excellent theory on how matter in close confines behaves.Our solar system and center of galaxies. But apparently it is not complete yet as Newton's theory was not complete either. Plasma does not consist of bound matter, but free electrons, ions and protons. It obeys the electromagnetic laws. This is why you do not need to put your coffee pot below the outlet. Why the galaxy does not rotate according to the gravitational laws for bound matter.

People resort to ad-hominem attacks when they have no argument against whatever it is you have presented. When you can't attack the message, you attack the messenger. That it is done in the name of science or religion only hurts the side anyone claims to follow. Best thing is to ignore it, most just ignore those posts like that anyway. Just don't answer anyone that posts stuff that way, sooner or later they'll only get responses when they stop. Me, I'm just not worried about responding back and am rarely diplomatic about it. But then I am not trying to convince the person I am debating with. I have found over the years that you can't change any ones mind you are debating with regardless of the facts. It is the ones that just follow along that you will have a chance of reaching.

It is like a court of law. You have two sides that each argue for their own position. But it is neither of the presenting sides that cast the ballots, nor is it those that are called as witnesses in support, but the ones that now and then ask a question. These are the only ones you will EVER convince of a debate forum. Those who have yet to form an opinion either way.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why is it bad for universities to teach science?

It's not.

But they should teach it correctly, while keeping the students' moral state* in mind.

* In Christian theology, there is what is called state and standing. A person's state, is where he stands with the LORD with respect to his salvation; i.e., saved or not. A person's standing is where he stands with the LORD with respect to his sanctification; i.e., is he walking close to the LORD, or is he in the world.

 

[AV1611VET]

I bet you have almost zero standing to make that claim.

You lambaste atheists for not appreciating the judeo christian backgrounds to their schools? I challenge you to pony up your experience with advanced degrees and university life.

How far did YOU go?

I didn't.

I've never walked the halls of our mainline universities, like Yale, Harvard, or ... that one that starts with a "C" ... Columbia, I think?

 

[AV1611VET]

Mine had neither, but it certainly wouldn't have bothered me if it had. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Most of those that claim to follow what they are today claiming as science, have so much Fairie Dust in their cosmology it should be embarrassing to them. Not that science may get things wrong now and then, that's part of life. But that when the data and observation contradict theory, they never question the base assumptions. Instead they just add another undetectable and unfalsifiable entity and pronounce the magic words, "According to General Relativity..." Abracadabra does about the same effect to it.

Yes, GR is an excellent theory on how matter in close confines behaves.Our solar system and center of galaxies. But apparently it is not complete yet as Newton's theory was not complete either. Plasma does not consist of bound matter, but free electrons, ions and protons. It obeys the electromagnetic laws. This is why you do not need to put your coffee pot below the outlet. Why the galaxy does not rotate according to the gravitational laws for bound matter.

People resort to ad-hominem attacks when they have no argument against whatever it is you have presented. When you can't attack the message, you attack the messenger. That it is done in the name of science or religion only hurts the side anyone claims to follow. Best thing is to ignore it, most just ignore those posts like that anyway. Just don't answer anyone that posts stuff that way, sooner or later they'll only get responses when they stop. Me, I'm just not worried about responding back and am rarely diplomatic about it. But then I am not trying to convince the person I am debating with. I have found over the years that you can't change any ones mind you are debating with regardless of the facts. It is the ones that just follow along that you will have a chance of reaching.

It is like a court of law. You have two sides that each argue for their own position. But it is neither of the presenting sides that cast the ballots, nor is it those that are called as witnesses in support, but the ones that now and then ask a question. These are the only ones you will EVER convince of a debate forum. Those who have yet to form an opinion either way.

What's "Fairie Dust"?

Is that the dust that cosmic evolutionists say accreted and formed our planet; as opposed to our planet coming into existence ex nihilo?

 

[sfs]

We aren't talking about the church. We are talking about universities.

Many American(*) colleges and universities were originally arms of the church, either legally or de facto; their secularization was indeed a major change to the American intellectual landscape. See George Marsden's The Soul of the American University for a well-regarded history of the change (which I regret to say I haven't read).

(*) Other countries, too, but I'm less familiar with the history there.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Many American(*) colleges and universities were originally arms of the church, either legally or de facto; their secularization was indeed a major change to the American intellectual landscape. See George Marsden's The Soul of the American University for a well-regarded history of the change (which I regret to say I haven't read).

(*) Other countries, too, but I'm less familiar with the history there.

Agreed, even our country was founded by those that came here to have freedom to worship in the way they chose to. Without religion past societies would have no cultural content at all. It is only in the 19th century that societies developed a culture separate from their religion. For centuries education schools were monasteries.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

I didn't.

I've never walked the halls of our mainline universities, like Yale, Harvard, or ... that one that starts with a "C" ... Columbia, I think?

So how would you know ANYTHING about what the true nature of academia should be, or how people have lost sight of their institution's origins or why that is a bad thing?

For some of us the academic experience you seem to have side-stepped was one of the most transformative of our existences. And interestingly enough, if you think one goes to college and loses all religious insight, you clearly have even LESS insight to academia than I originally thought!

YOU make some vague indictment of academia yet you have minimal experience with it? What kind of hubris is that?

What kind of PRIDE do you have to be undertaking to elevate yourself so high as to deride that which you have little experience in?

Your superiority tripped you up here. Your pride came through a bit too strong.

Perhaps you should go back and re-read certain parts of the Bible that lies at the heart of this faith you think should still inform the core of academia.

 

[BarryDesborough]

This question is for those of you who stand behind your college degrees to spout Antichristian and Antijewish rhetoric in the name of science:

If you went to a college or university that has a Hebrew or Christian heritage, did it bother you?

I get fed up with the lie that science is anti-Christian or anti-Jewish. It is anti-crackpot, but that's not the same thing.

 

[CabVet]

If you went to a college or university that has a Hebrew or Christian heritage, did it bother you?

Not one bit. If anything, it would probably have made me an agnostic faster.