|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,364 Year: 3,621/9,624 Month: 492/974 Week: 105/276 Day: 2/31 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evangelical Indoctrination of Children | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3662 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Hyroglyphx writes: Perhaps they do, but what is being questioned is who is the arbiter of such things? Theologians- and no-one else. 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...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ochaye Member (Idle past 5258 days) Posts: 307 Joined: |
quote:I repeat, the Marcan Appendix is not accepted as Scripture, along with a few other obvious accretions of the centuries.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ochaye Member (Idle past 5258 days) Posts: 307 Joined: |
quote:... 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3662 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
and anyone else who is technically competent. And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ochaye Member (Idle past 5258 days) Posts: 307 Joined: |
quote:The criteria are those agreed by 'the Catholic' expert theologians, Protestant expert theologians and uncommitted expert theologians. Party bias is irrelevant at this level.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2151 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:quote: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: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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2151 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4389 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Hope things are well ...
cavediver writes: ochave writes:
And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field? and anyone else who is technically competent. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4389 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Hope things are well ...
kbertsche writes: cavediver writes:
Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?" And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field? 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2125 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?" Wiki writes: Theology is the study and commentary on the existence and attributes of a god or gods, and of how that god or those gods relate to the world and, especially, to human existence and religious thought; more generally, it is the study of religious faith, practice, and experience, or of spirituality ... 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2151 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:Why do you treat "empirical" as the opposite of "subjective?" From dictionary.com:
sub⋅jec⋅tive [suhb-jek-tiv] —adjective 1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).
em⋅pir⋅i⋅cal [em-pir-i-kuhl] —adjective 1. derived from or guided by experience or experiment. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2151 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote: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."quote:Can one present evidence that the sky is 'generally regarded' as an 'exceptional' shade of blue? Forum Guidelines writes:
4. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.... 10 Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4389 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Hi kbertsche and thanks for the exchange.
Hope things are well with you and yours ... kbertsche writes: coyote writes:
Why do you treat "empirical" as the opposite of "subjective?" Theology is the virtual definition of subjectivity! 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)?
Forum Guidelines writes: 4. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4389 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Hi kbertsche ...
Hope all is well. kbertsche writes: weary writes:
Perhaps, and perhaps not. kbertsche writes:
Can one present evidence that the sky is 'generally regarded' as an 'exceptional' shade of blue? cavediver writes:
Can you present evidence that theology is "generally regarded" as "exceptionally subjective?" And your criteria for technically competent in what is generally regarded as an exceptionally subjective field? quote: But if no evidence can be presented, it should not be claimed here. Where do you perceive any claims within my query k-bert?
Message 204 was only meant to offer reasoned argumentation.
Especially if some of us do not regard the sky in this way ... 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.
... and would view such "bare assertions" as "needling, hectoring and goading." 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ochaye Member (Idle past 5258 days) Posts: 307 Joined: |
quote: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'.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024