lab (05/10/83)
(It got interesting here - Taking the Plunge II arrived AFTER the responses to it! Also, news volume has been DOWN - apparently decvax is likewise.) A short answer to Bob Lied's short article, then expanding on "Plunge II." (not aimed at Jeff, but everyone, moi aussi) The courts have ruled that, while colleges may permit students to gather on campus for Bible Study and prayer, state-run primary and secondary schools may not. One also notes (from another newsgroup) that there are some things kids should learn at home. But when what is taught at home is not reinforced at school, where most of a child's peers are and where peer pressure is greatest (it being one of the greatest influences in a child's life), the lesson can be easily lost. There is an important distinction between the school being a function of the state and being a function of the home. This is one of the major reasons for the growth in private schools - more home control. ... One notes that "Taking the Plunge II" was posted before my last article, so I will try not to belabor any point (like taxonomy or the resurrection). In any system of thinking, there must be some axioms. There comes a point when one tries to apply "criteria for evidence external to the beliefs being defended" that the criteria (for the criteria ...) must ultimately be axiomatic. This applies to humanism as much as it does to Christianity. The big difference is how obviously they exist. There are also a couple of questions on standards: those for "critical appraisal" and those for interpretation of the evidence. This latter point is probably one of the main sources of division on anything - economics, politics, medicine, science - and religion. Without a common standard to interpret by (and who will judge which is correct?), we aren't going to get anywhere. Perhaps Jeff has stated the problem most succinctly - a "foreign mode of thinking." I will grant that Christianity is, in a sense, very alien. Why? Man's reasoning brings glory to himself; God's purpose is to bring glory to Himself. One would ask a dangerous question: if your reasoning should bring you to agreeing that what I believe is true, to whom will you give the credit? (Read I Corinthians 1:29 first.) And if you agree it is true, will you act on it (i.e., not just agree it is true, but believe it personally)? Letting someone else have the throne of your life is very alien and NEVER easy, but that's what God demands. If your reasoning cannot allow this to happen in the end, I submit that *that* is a philosophical bias. God's ways aren't our ways - they are both beyond a complete search (Isaiah 55:8,9; Romans 11:33), and upside-down as far as the world is concerned (Luke 16:15, I Corinthians 1 & 2). If man by reasoning alone could search out God's ways, he would have cause to boast before God - taking glory from Him. Thot: If God vs. the world is upside-down, the reverse is also true. Larry Bickford decvax!decwrl!qubix!lab