Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Indoctrination of Children
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 31 of 295 (523787)
09-12-2009 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by kbertsche
09-10-2009 5:11 PM


kbertsche writes:
quote:
In the less emotionally-based Evangelical groups
Hold it just a second.
They aren't "less emotionally-based." They're differently emotionally-based. Rather than using outright scare tactics, they use other emotional techniques such as peer pressure, social isolation, leveraging of parental authority, etc.
The entire concept of a "children's ministry" is nothing but emotional manipulation.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by kbertsche, posted 09-10-2009 5:11 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by kbertsche, posted 09-13-2009 12:15 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 32 of 295 (523790)
09-12-2009 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by ochaye
09-10-2009 8:28 PM


ochaye responds to Rahvin:
quote:
quote:
News flash:
This demonstrates the intellectual level of the USA.
That's it? That's your entire response? No discussion over the very real existence of Christians who seem to think that the only way to save someone is to scare them? Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church don't exist? Christian Identity, Christian Patriot, Lambs of Christ, none of these terrorist organizations exist?
Why do you really think this kid is up there preaching about hell?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by ochaye, posted 09-10-2009 8:28 PM ochaye has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 33 of 295 (523794)
09-12-2009 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by kbertsche
09-11-2009 11:27 AM


kbertsche responds to Percy:
quote:
Why do you imply that evangelicals (including myself) are "creationists" who "reject scientific theories for unscientific reasons?"
Logical error: Affirming the consequent ("If P, then Q. Q, therefore P.")
That is, all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. You reversed the implication and wound up in a place that isn't true.
What Percy was saying is that one way to get to a creationist who rejects science is through evangelical fear. That doesn't mean all evangelicals are anti-science creationists. Just that many anti-scientist creationists are evangelicals and came to their anti-science creationist viewpoint because of their evangelism.
quote:
It's not that we like these ideas. But we have established the source and statements as true, so must try to incorporate these ideas into our theology, uncomfortable though it may be.
So it never occurs to you that you made a mistake? That what you thought was true isn't really as accurate as you might have thought? Your ability to judge is perfect and without error?
This has nothing to do with god. It has everything to do with you and your ability to make judgement calls.
Have you considered the possibility that god does exist but not in the way you think?
quote:
At some point, we must allow our likes, dislikes, and aesthetic notions to be overruled by truth and reality, both in science and in theology.
Indeed.
So where do all of these evangelical creationists come from?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by kbertsche, posted 09-11-2009 11:27 AM kbertsche has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by ochaye, posted 09-12-2009 5:01 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 34 of 295 (523795)
09-12-2009 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Rrhain
09-12-2009 4:55 PM


quote:
evangelical creationists
There is no such thing, of course.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Rrhain, posted 09-12-2009 4:55 PM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2009 5:12 PM ochaye has not replied
 Message 37 by cavediver, posted 09-12-2009 5:18 PM ochaye has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 35 of 295 (523798)
09-12-2009 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by ochaye
09-12-2009 5:01 PM


wrong again
Biblical Creation Society - Wikipedia
quote:
The Biblical Creation Society (BCS) is a United Kingdom-based creationist organisation founded in 1977 by Scottish minister Nigel M. de S. Cameron and a group of evangelical students, who were concerned about the popularity of theistic evolution among conservative Christians, but were repelled by the "wholly negative" attitude of the Evolution Protest Movement. Although inspired by the scientific creationism of John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris (authors of The Genesis Flood), it refused to limit its membership to only Young Earth creationists, and in its name rejected American attempts to separate scientific creationism from its Biblical roots (a separation rendered unnecessary by the lack of constitutional barriers to teaching creationism in the United Kingdom).[1]
Seems that they call themselves evangelicals and creationists.
I also get a lot of hits on google for "evangelical creationism" so a lot of people think there is such a thing.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : t
Edited by RAZD, : clarity

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ochaye, posted 09-12-2009 5:01 PM ochaye has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 36 of 295 (523799)
09-12-2009 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by ochaye
09-11-2009 9:50 PM


ochaye writes:
quote:
Now is there fact and reason to support the opinion that most people are not trash?
Of course.
It is a huge failure that you don't know what it is.
Think for a moment: If you can delcare that other people are trash, why can they not turn around and do the same to you?
Are you trash?
Hint: Resorting to your religious beliefs will not save you as they have theirs and by their standards, you do not measure up.
So which one of you is trash? Might the entire question be faulty in the first place?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by ochaye, posted 09-11-2009 9:50 PM ochaye has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 37 of 295 (523801)
09-12-2009 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by ochaye
09-12-2009 5:01 PM


evangelical creationists
There is no such thing, of course.
Huh? You mean discounting the 600 in my wife's church?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ochaye, posted 09-12-2009 5:01 PM ochaye has not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 38 of 295 (523851)
09-13-2009 12:15 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Rrhain
09-12-2009 4:26 PM


quote:
quote:
In the less emotionally-based Evangelical groups
Hold it just a second.
They aren't "less emotionally-based." They're differently emotionally-based. Rather than using outright scare tactics, they use other emotional techniques such as peer pressure, social isolation, leveraging of parental authority, etc.
Some Evangelical groups put more emphasis on emotion, others put more emphasis on the intellect, and some put more emphasis on the will. In a theological sense, all three aspects are necessary for conversion or for living the Christian life.
quote:
The entire concept of a "children's ministry" is nothing but emotional manipulation.
Absolutely not, in my experience (see Message 28). Do you have any evidence for your bald assertion?
Edited by kbertsche, : added ref to msg 28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Rrhain, posted 09-12-2009 4:26 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Rrhain, posted 09-13-2009 4:11 PM kbertsche has seen this message but not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 39 of 295 (523854)
09-13-2009 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Percy
09-12-2009 2:48 PM


Re: Asking the question a different way...
quote:
Which Christianity is orthodox?
Good question, but I thought I already answered it. I believe it is defined by the statements in the broadly-accepted creeds (e.g. Apostles', Nicene, Chalcedonian, etc.).
quote:
Evangelical Christianity will not concede that the Bible is equivocal on this particular belief (and on others), and I contend that such beliefs tell us more about the person holding them than about what the Bible says.
The question is, what makes evangelicals this way?
I believe it's primarily a matter of biblical interpretation. If someone could demonstrate a responsible, alternative interpretation which was consistent with all relevant biblical data, there would be a possibility of convincing people to change their views. To be accepted, the new interpretation should be superior to the old in some way (e.g. provide explanations for things that the old one can't). Then there is the secondary issue of church history; Christians are reluctant to deviate from historical interpretations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Percy, posted 09-12-2009 2:48 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Percy, posted 09-13-2009 4:04 AM kbertsche has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 40 of 295 (523870)
09-13-2009 4:04 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by kbertsche
09-13-2009 1:13 AM


Re: Asking the question a different way...
kbertsche writes:
quote:
Which Christianity is orthodox?
Good question, but I thought I already answered it. I believe it is defined by the statements in the broadly-accepted creeds (e.g. Apostles', Nicene, Chalcedonian, etc.).
And these all condemn most of humanity to hell? Also, I expect that just as the Bible is variously interpreted, so are the "broadly accepted creeds."
f someone could demonstrate a responsible, alternative interpretation which was consistent with all relevant biblical data...
The Bible's contradictory stance on many, many points means no such interpretation is possible. Which interpretation one accepts is an individual decision. The question again is why some people not only accept the least compassionate, least humanitarian interpretation possible, but won't acknowledge or cannot perceive that the Bible conveys no single consistent message on many issues.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by kbertsche, posted 09-13-2009 1:13 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by ochaye, posted 09-13-2009 5:42 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 42 by kbertsche, posted 09-13-2009 3:28 PM Percy has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 41 of 295 (523877)
09-13-2009 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Percy
09-13-2009 4:04 AM


What a farce.
quote:
Also, I expect that just as the Bible is variously interpreted, so are the "broadly accepted creeds."
So liars are acceptable, but those who tell the truth are sociopaths!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Percy, posted 09-13-2009 4:04 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Rrhain, posted 09-13-2009 4:17 PM ochaye has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 42 of 295 (523934)
09-13-2009 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Percy
09-13-2009 4:04 AM


Re: Asking the question a different way...
quote:
The Bible's contradictory stance on many, many points means no such interpretation is possible. Which interpretation one accepts is an individual decision.
You seem to believe that biblical interpretation is purely subjective, with no objective data or principles. Not so.
If one approaches the Bible with the belief that it is the Word of God (as theologians do), one will try to fit the biblical data together. Things may not fit perfectly and may leave some tensions; this is where a new interpretation has a chance to displace it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Percy, posted 09-13-2009 4:04 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Percy, posted 09-13-2009 3:58 PM kbertsche has seen this message but not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 295 (523938)
09-13-2009 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by ochaye
09-10-2009 7:49 PM


The Well of Bigotry
The unquestioning, mindless acceptance of these notions in atheist circles exposes atheism in the USA as a deep and nasty well of bigotry and indeed stupidity, even puerility. When will America grow up?
It's a damn good thing that you're above all that mean and nasty name calling. Wouldn't want you to fall in to that well of bigotry.

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samual Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ochaye, posted 09-10-2009 7:49 PM ochaye has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 44 of 295 (523940)
09-13-2009 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by kbertsche
09-13-2009 3:28 PM


Re: Asking the question a different way...
kbertsche writes:
You seem to believe that biblical interpretation is purely subjective, with no objective data or principles. Not so.
Yes, you're right, it's not so, and that's not what I believe.
As far as the Bible goes, what I was talking about wasn't a belief. It's a simple fact that the Bible contradicts itself on a number of issues, universalism being one of them. When evidence is contradictory and insufficient then it is only rational to recognize this fact. Anyone who instead reaches firm conclusions while citing this kind of supporting evidence is telling us much more about themselves than about the Bible.
Why is it so important to you to believe that the Bible is unambiguous on points where the ambiguity and ambivalence are obvious?
If one approaches the Bible with the belief that it is the Word of God (as theologians do), one will try to fit the biblical data together. Things may not fit perfectly and may leave some tensions; this is where a new interpretation has a chance to displace it.
Well, yes, new Biblical interpretations emerge all the time, that's why new religious sects are born and old ones die out. Rather than timeless truths, what you describe is more like the tentativity of science. Because the underpinning of Christianity is not the real world but a book upon which anyone can imprint any interpretation they like, like all religions it follows the currents of social and cultural change.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by kbertsche, posted 09-13-2009 3:28 PM kbertsche has seen this message but not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 45 of 295 (523941)
09-13-2009 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by kbertsche
09-13-2009 12:15 AM


kbertsche responds to me:
quote:
quote:
They aren't "less emotionally-based." They're differently emotionally-based. Rather than using outright scare tactics, they use other emotional techniques such as peer pressure, social isolation, leveraging of parental authority, etc.
Some Evangelical groups put more emphasis on emotion, others put more emphasis on the intellect, and some put more emphasis on the will. In a theological sense, all three aspects are necessary for conversion or for living the Christian life.
That doesn't respond to the point, though. That there are intellectual aspects to faith doesn't change the fact that they're using emotional manipulation.
quote:
Do you have any evidence for your bald assertion?
How does one "minister" without emotional manipulation to a child regarding something so significant as belief in god when they haven't even managed to acquire post-operative logic? You can get a kid to believe in anything, including that they've been sexually molested while participating in satanic rituals involving mass murder, all through emotional pressure. No need to talk about things like hell. You just need to make the kid that Mommy and Daddy won't love them anymore, that they're the only ones who can stop "bad things" from happening, play on a child's fear of being wrong, wanting to be good, their trust of authority, and you can get a kid to believe anything you want.
Why do you think kids get so anxious about Santa Claus? It's hardly like there's any real consequences for getting on his bad side. But they do go nuts over it because of all the emotional manipulation put upon them by their parents, their friends, and society around them. It certainly isn't because of "intellectual" or "will" arguments being used. It's all emotion.
Please explain how you administer to a child without manipulating them emotionally.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by kbertsche, posted 09-13-2009 12:15 AM kbertsche has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by ochaye, posted 09-13-2009 4:28 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 49 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-13-2009 4:41 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024