Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Interesting quiz
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 46 of 79 (282790)
01-31-2006 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Silent H
01-31-2006 5:00 AM


Re: Secular v Religious v Xian
it seems the rationialists were lumped togather with the anabaptists really it seems that any group that feels the burn of leaders who control religion wants to seperate it from goverment. more than likely the fathers felt it through the CoE's control over the crown and seeing a religious shift every new king or queen
While i would agree that you should atribute it to the right people, i don't really think you can, many groups believed it
as for the puritans they controled england for about a century or two then got kicked out after doing crazy things

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Silent H, posted 01-31-2006 5:00 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Silent H, posted 01-31-2006 5:15 AM ReverendDG has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 47 of 79 (282791)
01-31-2006 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by ReverendDG
01-31-2006 5:09 AM


Re: Secular v Religious v Xian
I am with you that more than just anabaptists supported that idea, however it is clear that as a large movement (perhaps I should say large and successful) it began with the anabaptists in a somewhat unbroken line to the founding of our nation.
Specifically the test asks about the "wall of separation between church and state" and attributes it to Jefferson. Well that is only partly true. While he was not an anabaptist he used that phrase while writing to the anabaptists (that is specifically where we got the phrase) and used their common terminology for the concept.
The concept was also proven as worthy within anabaptist communities within the colonies. They were certainly the first.

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ReverendDG, posted 01-31-2006 5:09 AM ReverendDG has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 48 of 79 (282807)
01-31-2006 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Coragyps
01-29-2006 10:16 PM


got 19 out of 20.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Coragyps, posted 01-29-2006 10:16 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 49 of 79 (282808)
01-31-2006 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by riVeRraT
01-29-2006 10:36 PM


Re: Bunch of crap
quote:
Well that is the biggest bunch of crap I ever saw for a test.
So, got a bad score, eh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by riVeRraT, posted 01-29-2006 10:36 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2006 8:02 AM nator has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 79 (282825)
01-31-2006 8:37 AM


19 out of 21.
I had to guess on two; one I got correct, the other wrong.
The other wrong answer was due to not remembering history correctly.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 51 of 79 (283180)
02-01-2006 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by riVeRraT
01-30-2006 7:50 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
No it means we have a church that stays out of government. Not a governement that stays out of church, or does not believe in God, or does not adhere to "biblical morals", whether they got them from the bible or not.
The church has to answer to governemt
try the reverse. we have freedom of religion, meaning, and i'm doing a little more than paraphrasing here, congress cannot make a law regarding religion. the government stays out of religion. that's pretty much what it says.
Then why do churches need a 501 c 3 ?
because churches should be making prophets, not profits. a 501(c)3 certifies an organization as not-for-profit.
It doesn't matter where you get your morals from. One way is not more right than another.
exactly. legally, the "christian" way is not more right than any other religion. we legislate based on secular values.
I also understand the similarities, and I have covered that before too.
I am asking that one not be more correct than the other, and that we have the freedom to choose whatever moral base we want. I think that is fair.
A scientific study is not a law
science is secular. it's not legislated, really, either. but it is not a religion, and you know that. science is taught in school because the only objections to it are religious ones. if i have a religion that says psychiatry was founded by an evil space alien to keep us all brainwashed, does a high school psychology class violate the establishment clause?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by riVeRraT, posted 01-30-2006 7:50 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2006 8:00 AM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 72 by randman, posted 02-05-2006 6:06 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 52 of 79 (283359)
02-02-2006 8:00 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by arachnophilia
02-01-2006 1:03 PM


Re: Bunch of crap
because churches should be making prophets, not profits. a 501(c)3 certifies an organization as not-for-profit.
So that just proves that churches must answer to governement.
Our laws dictate what a church is, or isn't.
science is secular. it's not legislated,
Yes it is legislated.
More than church.
So your saying we need to separate science and state, you agree with me?
But not all science, only the one true science, according to the science bible.
Oh wait, nothing is written in stone so mever mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by arachnophilia, posted 02-01-2006 1:03 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by arachnophilia, posted 02-02-2006 8:33 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 58 by macaroniandcheese, posted 02-02-2006 10:57 AM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 53 of 79 (283361)
02-02-2006 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by nator
01-31-2006 7:35 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
I got to the 3rd question and decided not to take it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by nator, posted 01-31-2006 7:35 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by nator, posted 02-03-2006 6:51 PM riVeRraT has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 54 of 79 (283367)
02-02-2006 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by riVeRraT
02-02-2006 8:00 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
So that just proves that churches must answer to governement.
Our laws dictate what a church is, or isn't.
yes, and we have a second amendment right to bear arms, too. but you still need a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
a 501(c)3 makes it so that church doesn't have to PAY TAXES. that sounds like a benefit, to me. doesn't it.
Yes it is legislated.
More than church.
science is not legislated. keep in mind that it's the churches that don't like science, not the other way around. learning science does not establish or detract from religion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2006 8:00 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 55 of 79 (283378)
02-02-2006 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by riVeRraT
01-30-2006 8:04 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
yes. you have the right to believe whatever you want. you can even believe that your toilet is god and it imparts wisdom through your anus to you.
however, you do not have the right to legislate based on your beliefs. if there is no non-religious reason for a law, it should not stand. (note: this is not the case.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by riVeRraT, posted 01-30-2006 8:04 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 56 of 79 (283382)
02-02-2006 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by randman
01-30-2006 11:58 AM


Re: Secular v Religious v Xian
to get the meaning of 'the whole body of the church' you have to lowercase the c. but you're being argumentative. you know full well Catholic refers to the roman catholic church or at the very most the roman and eastern rite churches. it doesn not mean 'the whole church' to anyone even those who have read the westminster confession.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by randman, posted 01-30-2006 11:58 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by randman, posted 02-05-2006 6:00 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 57 of 79 (283383)
02-02-2006 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Silent H
01-31-2006 5:00 AM


Re: Secular v Religious v Xian
yeah. the puritans talked about religious freedom. they certainly didn't practice it. but then christians have talked about compassion and 'blessed are the peacemakers' for how many years and crap if that's the case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Silent H, posted 01-31-2006 5:00 AM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by randman, posted 02-05-2006 6:07 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 58 of 79 (283391)
02-02-2006 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by riVeRraT
02-02-2006 8:00 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
because churches should be making prophets, not profits. a 501(c)3 certifies an organization as not-for-profit.
So that just proves that churches must answer to governement.
Our laws dictate what a church is, or isn't.
um. no. jesus what the one who discouraged church involvement in money. or doesn't it apply since it's not related to selling sacrificial animals?
Yes it is legislated.
More than church.
the hell you say.
let me explain the scientific process to you. not the method, the process.
i get some fantastic idea about how something works.
i think about it and read what is published on the subject.
i write up a sumarry of what's been published. this is called a lit review.
then i form a clear statement of how i think my idea works. this is called a thesis proposal. this includes a statement of methodology. i.e. will you be taking a survey or fiddling with chemicals or training dogs to eat each other or whatever.
then i call some people and send them these two things. they send me money to pursue it. these things can be very time consuming and prevent things like jobs from happening. also, you can present them to your department if you are a professor and they will give you funding for graduate assistants to help you with the project and teaching assistants to teach your classes while you're busy.
then you conduct your research. this may take a very long time (sometimes 50 years for psychologists or those crazy anthro kids). and if you live through it, you state your results in a long and drawn out fashion and then present it at a conference. then someone else takes your paper and re-conducts your experiment (in the case of hard sciences) or reanalyzes your statistics or whatever (in the case of soft 'sciences').
so if these people can redo your experiment and get the same results, you get published in a journal. then someone loves you and you publish an even longer version in a book and you go on sabatical to rest your tired brain.
did you see any legislation in there?
i mean. maybe you could say that the retest is a kind of legislation since if they can't repeat the experiment it is proclaimed invalid. but that's a good thing. being able to say someone is wrong is a very powerful thing. you can't do it with religion. there's no way we can prevent the next pope from deciding that jesus isn't important and we all have to sacrifice virgins to maintain the purity of the blessed mother. (btw. that's just an example. and a crazy one.)
but yes. we can legislate base on scientific discoveries because they are inherently a reflection of reality and not controlled by politics. (ideally. this has no hold over the bomb or oil or cigarrettes.) religion is very political, however. and can change at the drop of a hat. science takes at least 7 years to change. cause that's how long it takes to get published.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 02-02-2006 11:01 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2006 8:00 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by riVeRraT, posted 02-04-2006 12:27 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 79 (283705)
02-03-2006 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by riVeRraT
02-02-2006 8:02 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
quote:
I got to the 3rd question and decided not to take it.
Didn't know the anwers, eh? Or maybe you just got angry that the notions of US history and the basis of our government are not based in Christianity like you thought they were.
You do know that those questions were all factual in basis, right?
If you got so upset while taking it that you couldn't continue, then I'd say that you are probably having issues with facts that you wish weren't true.
Well, anyway, you have no basis for saying that the quiz is "crap" as you didn't even read all of the questions, nor did you learn any of the events and facts that the correct answers consist of.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-03-2006 06:52 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2006 8:02 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by riVeRraT, posted 02-04-2006 12:32 AM nator has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 60 of 79 (283795)
02-04-2006 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by macaroniandcheese
02-02-2006 10:57 AM


Re: Bunch of crap
did you see any legislation in there?
Yes, half that stuff is governed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by macaroniandcheese, posted 02-02-2006 10:57 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by nator, posted 02-04-2006 7:28 PM riVeRraT 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