This forum was a bad idea

<p>
[quote]
There are many folks who are interested in Christian colleges for their kids.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Might we simply say, "there are many folks who are interested in their kids." </p>

<p>Yes, unfortunately cultural assessments/evaluations and portrayal of "value" tend to virtually ignore intentional, spiritual designs for growth. Academe and thus current society have become enamored with the natural at the near-total expense of the super-natural. Truth is deemed to stem from the logical, the scientific, the provable. If man cannot figure it out, then it must not be "true." And of course this is all a reflection of a world consumed by the pursuit of consumption. </p>

<p>My personal perspective on this is that if one's home has portrayed and allowed for a firm foundation of faith beyond all this stuff that in the blink of a gnat's eyelash will become absolutely meaningless, the secular campus, which is virtually all but a few colleges and universities these days, may not be the cauldron that cooks one into the Kingdom, but it won't be to blame either for students heading for "heck" either. The concept of in loco parentis, which had some valuable partnership when many colleges honestly pursued the exploration and nurture of the Supernatural among their students (beyond angels, UFOs, witches, etc. all of which are extremely popular on campuses), is such a dead concept even at places discussed on this thread. When was last time you heard of a "house mother?" </p>

<p>So what might be points in my meandering? </p>

<p>*Places like Liberty can be terrific, or as limiting as their secular counterparts.</p>

<ul>
<li>A Christian college can overtly nurture or diminish faith.</li>
</ul>

<p>*A secular college will probably minimize the search for faith, at least overtly. Conversely, the hedonism can be the very thing that drives thoughtful students to the search for a better answer. And God is even on THAT campus. Maybe ESPECIALLY on that campus.</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Parents can be delusional thinking that by sending their children to a Christian college, they'll be sexually, sensually, "suds" and secularly safe. Girls and boys together @ age 20 nearly always trump a monastic night @ college vespers. Unless one's heart has been broken by the other ...</p></li>
<li><p>No matter what, parents in love with their children need to stay in touch, help students to stay grounded.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>One last thought that's an old one: Apologetics, i.e. arguing one's case for Christianity rarely leads or pushes he who's determined to dig in his hell-bound heels. Bravo for courageous, clear explanations and let all hear continue to offer up their glimpses of Jesus and his Kingdom that those nuggets of gold might entice ones to answer the knock they claim not to hear. Dammit! You know, "I ain't afraid a no ghosts!" </p>

<p>Many have offered the thought that the possibility of a Savior isn't necessary who believe they have everything right here on earth, and when it's over, it's over.</p>

<p>And they are literally banking every action, every relationship, every thought on that notion. Each person is his own little universe and god. Whatever is good for me, is well, good. All the information that counts is what we can prove, what science portrays is true, what we think we know from our own experience, what our intuition claims for us. (despite all those failed romances, imperfect jobs, drink and food that we consumed in excess, sexual interludes that were so wonderful on the frontend and nightmarish after the fact, etc.) </p>

<p>Christians conversely believe in and hope for tomorrow and work at living accordingly, to serve others because we are called to serve by He who saved us. On the surface, it seems like a bad trade. Gotta give up the "good life" for what! The trick comes like eating those things our parents told us were good AND good for us, but we couldn't stomach until we grew up. Hey fresh asparagus is great, brussel sprouts can be yummy, mushrooms really add to that steak, and on and on. And suddenly our meals become so much more than over-cooked wienies and PBnJ's. But none could convince me of that when I was 6! </p>

<p>But it doesn't end there...and that's what Christians discover. It only gets better and better. And the trick is not trying to not outlive either our bank accounts or our bodies or those who would pretend they'll take care of us in our old age.</p>

<p>And I'd reiterate what's been noted earlier ...the risk in wrongly answering this single most important question of life is everything, forever for the unBelieving. Conversely, for the Believer, all it means is he/she worked at trying to live a life of service to others.</p>

<p>blue_box,</p>

<p>The proof you are asking for has already been given and it is all around you (and I am not talking about the text found in this forum or thread). Quite honestly, at this point, I do not think that if Jesus Christ Himself came down and stood in front of you that you would accept it...instead, you would most likely dismiss it as a ghost, or hallucination, anything except Christ Himself. God has provided mankind with a wealth of evidence of His existance...mankind, however, has the keen ability to dismiss the evidence when it conflicts with their own version of God.</p>

<p>
[quote]
God has provided mankind with a wealth of evidence of His existance...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, really? Do elaborate.</p>

<p>The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.
- It's perfect size and corresponding gravity: any smaller and the atmosphere would be impossible, like Mercury...any larger and its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.
- Atmosphere is mixed with the precisely accurate mixuture of gases to sustain like.
- Located just the right distance from the Sun, any closer and we would burn up, any further away and we would freeze.</p>

<p>Human Brain: Ability to process an amazing amount of information and controls every action and reaction in all humans; more complex than the brains found in any other living organism.</p>

<p>Human Eye: able to distinguish among 7 million colors</p>

<p>Science and evolution is unable to explain how something so complex as the human brain or eye came into existance from nonliving matter.</p>

<p>Uniformity of the laws of nature: unexplainable by any scientific explanation. Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize winner in quantum electrodynamics, "WHy nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of mirable."</p>

<p>Complexity of DNA: far to complex to have just happened by accident.</p>

<p>Need more proof? Read "The Evidence for Christianity" by former atheist Ralph Muncaster. He spent 15 years conducting research to dispute the Bible, to dispute Christianity and the existance of God. He used anthropology, history, molecular biology, physics, his engineering education and an extremely skeptical mind to try to "overturn" the concept that God is real and the Bible is more than just a "nice story". The answers he found were sufficient to convince him that not only was the Bible accurate but that God really did exist.</p>

<p>Nikiil, why is the bible literal?</p>

<p>Tboone,</p>

<p>Rather than rehash this question with you, as it has been discussed in other postings, you might benefit more from ready the same book I recommended to blue_box. Ralph Muncaster has some interesting information regarding many of the Biblical passages that many Christians consider literal. He's used science and secularly accepted historical facts to prove the validity of the Bible (his true mission, as I stated earlier was to disprove the Bible). If the Biblical accounts can be proven, then they have to have a literal interpretation...as a figurative meaning is subject to perspective and cannot be proven.</p>

<p>And I'd recommend you read A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson. It'll quash your theories about their being a Designer who created the Earth, and all that.</p>

<p>EDIT: When I reach home I'll quote a few passages from that.</p>

<p>Everyone, even non-Believers have their own Bible. Not many'd claim Bryson as their Messiah tho.</p>

<p>As a former chair of mechan engineering @Texas A&M prof rightly noted, aetheism is a moral, not intellectual decision. His point including among others, that aetheists live life in that context because they prefer to, not because it makes logical sense or that there are coherent intellectual rationale or evidence. They simply choose to live that type of life. We simply don't want to give up what we perceive is the good life, for what Christ assured was a better one.</p>

<p>Here's Dr. Bradley's personal observations if any are interested ...</p>

<p>My</a> Quest for Success</p>

<p>There are many other scientists who've "worshipped" the so-called truths of science, and ultimately been persuaded, convicted, and converted by that science. They come to realize the order, magnitude, timing, precision, and balance of the larger universe and earth's minutiae simply could not be products of chance. And ultimately their open-minded explorations then lead them to the real deal, JC. :cool:</p>

<p>Perhaps more important, it was Professor Bradley's observation of the goodness of Christianity that attracted him to want to know why Christians seemed to have that which he so wanted. It's that very same observation that has drawn people to the Christian life for 2,000 years now. People are filled with joy that comes from Christ and as C.S. Lewis notes, so much good in the world has come of it.</p>

<p>I apologize for not replying to this earlier. I'll have to continue this debate at a later time.. Exams are starting and I'm swamped. -___-
Absolutely hosed.</p>

<p>Good luck in your exams, bb. Knock 'em dead, do your best, make your creator proud. And your parents,too! ;)</p>

<p>For of course, in the absence of that Creator, there is no such notion as pride. Frogs and chimps have none. Recognize it and use it for good. Remember where it comes from. Boast only that you've been blessed with brains, opportunities, and capacity for goodness and otherwise. Blessings, friend.</p>

<p>Thanks. =)</p>

<p>EDIT: That seems like an insufficient reply to your post, but I really can't manage a better one at this time. I promise you, once I have more free time, I'll be back to my eloquent best. =P</p>

<p>No need unless you wish. Always good chatting. My good wishes were just that ...and if you'd not be offended, I'll pray for your outstanding accomplishment. Just do your best. And let us know how you make out. See you soon. :cool:</p>

<p>Haha. No, I won't be offended. I believe in God too. Just not the way you look at it. =P</p>

<p>Yea. See ya. :)</p>

<p>"They come to realize the order, magnitude, timing, precision, and balance of the larger universe and earth's minutiae simply could not be products of chance."</p>

<p>This is a minority view among scientists.</p>

<p>^ thats very disputable, and I know scientists that lie on both sides of the divide, but in the end, thats irrelevant.</p>

<p>Nikki or WP, where in the bible does it say that the bible is literal?</p>

<p>vossron, I would disagree. Undoubtedly many insecure scientists doggedly hold onto the silly notion that the world's creation was sorta like a tornado blowing through a junkyard and the outcome was a Boeing 777 filled with bodies ...but this is about time and $. Too many scientists have banked their entire careers on what are quickly being debunked as unfounded presuppositions. Furthermore, research $$ has been narrowly provided to these secular notions, and so to genuinely pursue truth with an open mind would risk professional standing, future, and funding to keep the ol' cottage industry afloat. So the one-time starry-eyed pursuers of truth are effectively neutered. To hell with the truth, literally. And there's nowhere to go but the route you offer. Denial of the obvious, and pursuit down that road that simply goes in circles. </p>

<p>T-Bone ...I believe you've some homework that remains undone, but that aside, why do you ask about the degree of truth found in the Bible? btw, cap "B." Please lend some insight to your question. Is it genuine or otherwise? Help us to know how or if it merits any consideration?</p>

<p>I think the Anglican view on the Bible is that it contains everything you need to know about salvation, and I would agree. No matter how literally or metaphorically you take the content of the Bible, it's John 3:16 that counts. (Not that that's the only important verse! :-)</p>

<p>This is genuine, I honestly do not understand how people take the bible as the "literal word of God".</p>

<p>This thread was created to express surprise that there's a christian college forum, not to spew silly religious dogma.</p>

<p>Tboone,</p>

<p>Chritians take the Bible as the literal Word of God because so much of the Bible has come true. It isn't just a nice little bedtime story designed to make people feel good. It is filled with historical facts, cultural enlightenment, and a glimmer of what the future holds for all mankind. The Old and New Testament is considered the most reliable document of antiquity, with more than 20,000 known New Testament manuscripts to support its writings and many Old Testament manscripts.</p>

<p>In comparison, some secular books have much fewer manuscripts available, yet are used as factual:</p>

<p>Plato: written from 427-347 BC, earliest known copy: 900AD (1200 years after it was "written"; only 7 known manuscripts that support the information.</p>

<p>Pliny the Younger: written from 61-113 AD; earliest known copy: 850AD (750 years after it was "written"; only 7 known manuscripts.</p>

<p>Aristotle: written from 384-322 BC; earliest known copy: 1100AD (1400 years after it was "written"; 49 manuscripts of any one work.</p>

<p>Sophocles: written from 496-406 BC; earliest known copy: 1000 AD (1400 years after it was "writen"; 193 known manuscripts.</p>

<p>Compare that to the New Testament: </p>

<p>Greek versions (Uncials, Miniscules, Lectionaries, Papyri, Recent finds: 5309 Extant Greek MSS</p>

<p>Latin Vulgate: 10,000+</p>

<p>Ethiopic: 2000+</p>

<p>Matthew: date of writing: 50-75 AD, earliest Extant MSS: circa 200 AD, less than 200 years</p>

<p>John: date of writing: 90-110 AD, earliest extant MSS: circa 130 AD, less than 100 years.</p>

<p>Given the historical accuracy of the Bible, compared to other "reliable" historical information, why wouldn't we believe the Bible is the literal Word of God??</p>