Evangelical Indoctrination of Children

Ah, so you mean the Catholic theologians... not sure how that helps your own side. Oh, sorry, did you mean the liberal theologians? Again, not sure if that actually helps. I guess you probably mean Evangelical theologians - but obviously not those evangelical theologians where their evangelical status would be dismissed by those Evangelicals such as yourself. Glad we have that cleared up...

quote:

---

the scriptures really aren't free from human influence

---

I repeat, the Marcan Appendix is not accepted as Scripture, along with a few other obvious accretions of the centuries.

quote:

---

you mean the Catholic theologians

---

... and anyone else who is technically competent. Atheists can be that. If skeptics are going to start and contribute to threads of this nature in a constructive manner, they had better be that.

And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field?

quote:

---

criteria for technically competent

---

The criteria are those agreed by 'the Catholic' expert theologians, Protestant expert theologians and uncommitted expert theologians. Party bias is irrelevant at this level.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The Assemblies of God should probably not be called "fringe." However, they do have some unusual doctrinal distinctives that separate them from most other Evangelicals.

---

Perhaps they do, but what is being questioned is who is the arbiter of such things? All Christians claim to be "true Christians," the whole "no true Scotsman" theory.

---

And you asked again in Message 195:

quote:

---

Which still leaves the question, who arbitrates such things?

---

Who arbitrates such things in science? All scientists and pseudo-scientists claim to be "true scientists," just like the "no true Scotsman" theory.In Christianity we have some creeds which have been accepted by both Catholics and Protestants; these creeds act as "arbiters" of fundamental theological questions. Catholics also have a Pope and Magesterium to arbitrate disputes.Science has none of these things, so one could argue that the problem is more acute in science than in theology.

quote:

---

And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field?

---

Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?"

Hope things are well ... Might it be fair to suggest that one is 'technically competent' - whether regarding Levitical Catholicism, Levitical Protestantism or Levitical Evangelicism in general, as long as they maintain their theological submissions within the boundaries of apologetic discourse as it relates to the magik of a blood sacrifice?One Love

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Hope things are well ... Can one present evidence that the sky is 'generally regarded' as an 'exceptional' shade of blue?One Love

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

First, there has been no empirical evidence for "the existence and attributes of a god or gods" although there have been millennia of dialog on the subject.Second, there are some 4,000 world religions (of which Christianity is the largest), and there are some 38,000 subdivisions, sects, or denominations of Christianity.And this isn't subjective? Theology is the virtual definition of subjectivity!The last thing theologians or believers want is empirical evidence to decide among their various claims. (I suspect they're afraid that all of their claims would be found wanting.)We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

quote:

---

First, there has been no empirical evidence for "the existence and attributes of a god or gods" although there have been millennia of dialog on the subject.

​

Second, there are some 4,000 world religions (of which Christianity is the largest), and there are some 38,000 subdivisions, sects, or denominations of Christianity.

​

And this isn't subjective? Theology is the virtual definition of subjectivity!

---

Why do you treat "empirical" as the opposite of "subjective?"From dictionary.com: You are trying to make a case that theology is non-empirical, but this does not make the case that it is subjective. Empiricism and objectivity are different concepts.Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?"

---

Can one present evidence that the sky is 'generally regarded' as an 'exceptional' shade of blue?

---

Perhaps, and perhaps not. But if no evidence can be presented, it should not be claimed here. Especially if some of us do not regard the sky in this way, and would view such "bare assertions" as "needling, hectoring and goading."

Hi kbertsche and thanks for the exchange.
Hope things are well with you and yours ... Are you able to demonstrate how theology is derived and guided by experimentation, as opposed to belonging to your mind rather than to a god or god(s)? In the name of brother Joshua the Anointed One, peace be with you.One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Hi kbertsche ...
Hope all is well.

quote:

---

Forum Guidelines

​

4. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation ...

​

Avoid bare assertions ...

---

Where do you perceive any claims within my query k-bert? Message 204 was only meant to offer reasoned argumentation. It's safe to assume you may not regard the sky as an exceptional shade of blue then?I can hardly tell, as you seem to be barely asserting your position. Perhaps the issue is derived from regarding a question as a claim ...In the name of brother Joshua the Anointed One, peace be with you.One Love

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

quote:

---

In Christianity we have some creeds which have been accepted by both Catholics and Protestants

---

Christianity cannot be represented by both Catholics and Protestants, because they are opposed at fundamental level. There are today many Catholics posing as Protestants alleging that this is not the case, because there is a very strong desire to obscure from the public the fundamental difference between them.However, basic technical terminology can be agreed in theology, just as chemists can agree on the meaning of the word 'amphoteric', and economists can agree on the meaning of the word 'fiscal'.