Is anything taught in the bible?

Originally posted by Suzianne
[b]Everyone is a leftist from where you're sitting.[/b]

Perhaps everyone in your world. In my world there are plenty of people who hold very similar views.

As a matter of fact, some are juat a conservative as me on social issues and more conservative on economic.

Originally posted by Eladar
I don't need to read about how you looked into another guys eyes and how you reacted.

Trollololololololololololololololololol.........

Originally posted by wolfgang59

What is taught in the bible if anything?[/b]

I mean taught in the pedagogical sense not in the prescriptive sense.
eg If a teacher tells you that F=ma that isn't really teaching is it?
Only when they show, deduce or explain does it become teaching.

Hmmm, "F=ma" isn't really teaching anything, huh?
So when the first grade teacher teaches the children 1 + 1 = 2 to you that "isn't really teaching" ?

I don't understand this too well.

A prescription might be "To touch the hot stove will cause a burn" ie. T=B.
Sure to go on to explain why is teaching too.

The Bible teaches in both ways.

Originally posted by sonship
... "F=ma" isn't really teaching anything, huh?
So when the first grade teacher teaches the children 1 + 1 = 2 to you that "isn't really teaching" ?

[/b]

If you tell a child 1+1=2 that is certainly NOT teaching.

Telling a child 1+1 =2 will not help them figure out 2+1 or 100+100
but teaching them well.

I know education is behind in the US but ....... 😞

Originally posted by Eladar
If you read it and believe it, then you learned it by reading the Bible.

Play word games with your definition of taught all you like.

Read this:

YOU ARE AN IDIOT

Originally posted by wolfgang59
If you [b]tell a child 1+1=2 that is certainly NOT teaching.

Telling a child 1+1 =2 will not help them figure out 2+1 or 100+100
but teaching them well.

I know education is behind in the US but ....... 😞[/b]

You are so messed up.

You are correct, Americans do not know that 2 plus 1 is 3 because they were taught one plus one is two.

Originally posted by Eladar
You are so messed up.

You are correct, Americans do not know that 2 plus 1 is 3 because they were taught one plus one is two.

Really?
A child has to be told 2+1 = 3?
Then told every conceivable addition fact?
You are demonstrably wrong.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Really?
A child has to be told 2+1 = 3?
Then told every conceivable addition fact?
You are demonstrably wrong.

People can think on their own.

I don't think anyone knows every conceivable math fact. This is why people are shown an algorithm to add numbers.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Read this:

YOU ARE AN IDIOT

there's only so much patience any of us mortals have.
(i usually dont go str8 for the jugular but this guy...)

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Really?
A child has to be told 2+1 = 3?
Then told every conceivable addition fact?
You are demonstrably wrong.

Really?
A child has to be told 2+1 = 3?
Then told every conceivable addition fact?
----------------------------------------------

They are usually given many examples to learn the principle.
Of course teachers do not go to your suggested extreme of teaching the infinite number of examples.

You are demonstrably wrong.
-----------------------------------------------

You demonstratably want to make a case where none exists.
Teaching involves communicating principles, communicating examples, and providing explanations.

The Bible does all of these.

Originally posted by sonship
[b] Really?
A child has to be told 2+1 = 3?
Then told every conceivable addition fact?
----------------------------------------------

They are usually given many examples to learn the principle.
Of course teachers do not go to your suggested extreme of teaching the infinite number of examples.

You are demonstrably wrong.
------- ...[text shortened]... principles, communicating examples, and providing explanations.

The Bible does all of these.[/b]

The bible may do all of those things but it certainly doesn't do them well.

example: the 10 comandments. every one of them tells you what not to do. I find this sort of approach negative and restrictive. Whereas say the Buddhists will tell what to do. It's more of a guidelike approach than the biblical 'one size fits all' approach.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
The bible may do all of those things but it certainly doesn't do them well.

example: the 10 comandments. every one of them tells you what not to do. I find this sort of approach negative and restrictive. Whereas say the Buddhists will tell what to do. It's more of a guidelike approach than the biblical 'one size fits all' approach.

Honor your father and mother.

Originally posted by Eladar
Honor your father and mother.

Yep. Point taken.
My point was that the bible is vague and much of it seems to be neither here nor there whereas I find the sutras and other Eastern literature more on point.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
The bible may do all of those things but it certainly doesn't do them well.

example: the 10 comandments. every one of them tells you what not to do. I find this sort of approach negative and restrictive. Whereas say the Buddhists will tell what to do. It's more of a guidelike approach than the biblical 'one size fits all' approach.

The bible may do all of those things but it certainly doesn't do them well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It gets people in touch with the living God well.
Of course people have to be willing to let their lives be changed by reading it.

Most of the people I know who do not want to be changed by God stay clear of the Bible.
At the same time they seem to fancy themselves as experts on the book they stay clear of.


example: the 10 comandments. every one of them tells you what not to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The commandment about the keeping of the Sabbath day is a "shall do" much more than a shall not do.

The commandment to honor father and mother is a shall do.


I find this sort of approach negative and restrictive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The law of God was given very much for the purpose of exposing the sin nature which cannot please God.

Fallen man said "All that the Lord has commanded we will do" because the fallen man is full of self confidence. One purpose of the law of Moses was to expose man's inability and need for redemption and salvation.


Whereas say the Buddhists will tell what to do. It's more of a guidelike approach than the biblical 'one size fits all' approach.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many people will always prefer a Force or The Force or a Vibration or Oversoul of energy of something like this to a Righteous living God. All the forces of mystical Buddhism are on a lower level of existence than a living Person. You can look down up IT and use IT. It preserves human expected autonomy.

In the natural man, the sinner will always prefer obligation to a Force than to Righteous living God. Of course the Love of a Righteous God is the other side of a living Person which you would not get from a Buddhist state of "salvation".

The other side of obligation to a living God who is absolutely Righteous is the eternal Love of that God also.

Originally posted by sonship
[b] The bible may do all of those things but it certainly doesn't do them well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It gets people in touch with the living God well.
Of course people have to be willing to let their lives be changed by reading it.

Most of the people I know wh ...[text shortened]... of obligation to a living God who is absolutely Righteous is the eternal Love of that God also.[/b]

I'll bite 🙂

1. I understand the whole living god thing and being open to be changed by the bible. It works . I've seen it and I dont deny it, and I'm not talking of the fakers on tv, I'm talking of the real 'salt of the Earth' type Christians. Thing is I just can't subscribe to a 'one size fits all' idea because it ...well it just doesn't feel right. That may seem vague but you have to admit that Christianity covers a lot. Like from the Gnostics to the KKK. So I don't really want to be asociated with such an antiquated theology.


2.Thou shall Not work on the Sabbath, sounds like your turning a negative into a positive hear. The other point you repeated from Eladar,which I already noted.

3.I don't knoow exactly what you mean by " Many people prefer...expected autonomy", but trust me I don't prefer a "Force" or any other variants of that idea that you mentioned. I prefer myself and always have. In that regard I'm not different from just about anyone. Point is the way in which I see myself and especially my ego.
Ever heard of the "White Death"? It's like the "extinguishment of the ego". Very scary. Very personal, But ultimately unlike anything that can be described in Earthly terms.

4.You simply don't know what Buddhism is. In fact that is a very common koan (What is Buudhism? ). Remember it's a koan. The answer does not come from any "logic". But again, there is no harm in trying... and failing.