As much as I hate to say it....Southeast Michigan.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder? My mom just emailed me and told me she has been diagnosed with the beginning stages of COPD...of course...after I moved half-way around the world...after she made me feel guilty about moving...after she told me I would be sorry for leaving her. I don't know much about it and what I am reading scares me. She's only 59! I am worried and I feel like I weigh 100 pounds heavier under all this guilt. I couldn't move home to be with her now if I wanted to. I am under contract. Now I feel even more guilty for loving it here while she is sick at home. AHHHHH!!!!! :banghead: :willy_nilly: :crying:

You are correct. You do NOT have to know the answer to every single detail in order to believe. We can't know every single detail. But do YOU believe that WHAT you believe is REALLY REAL? Do you believe it is Truth? 1. If a Christian were to answer that question with: Yes, I believe that the basic principles of Christianity are Truth, then they would have to answer KingM's question about whether or not Christianity and Hinudism can both be Truth with NO. You can't have two opposing ideas BOTH be Truth. If one is truth then the other is, by virtue of the meaning of truth, not truth. 2. this is the same line of thinking that lead to the hypothetical question in the first place. No, we cannot PROVE that Christianity is Truth. But what if we could? Would those who are not Christians convert? What if we could PROVE that Christianity is a hoax? Would you walk away? The idea behind the topic was to get at the heart of what you REALLY believe.

. Basically we are coming at this from two different types of apologetics. I presuppose that the Bible is true (inerrant, infallible, inspired) and my views on every aspect of these topics will spring from that presupposition. But it's an interesting discussion anyways!;)

it's a great question We all have different areas of "sin" that prevent us from becoming more Christ-like. For some it might be wealth and the pursuit of wealth. For others it might be alcohol, drugs, porn or even pride. For my dh it was vanity to be honest. He was obsessed with bodybuilding and it began to take precedent in his life over everything else. Over family, over God. It became his idol. Not everyone is hyper-concerned with getting rich. I know I'm not. But my area of sin is my temper. So the story of Jesus telling the rich man to give up his wealth wasn't about all Christians should live in poverty. It was about "getting your priorities in order." Nothing in your life comes before God. If it does, then it is an area of sin that you need to work on. In our elementary chapel each week we have given the kids only ONE rule to follow: "Don't get in the way... of what God has for you or what God has for other people." To me that sums up the problem if sin pretty succinctly. God has a plan for each of us but we spend our time getting in the way of that because we think we can either do it better or do it without Him entirely. We want to be our own God. That's why man is "fallen".

It's not the knowledge of good and evil that makes us depraved. The "fall of man" is based on the fact that we sinned when we disobeyed God. We were created "good"...without sin... but then we chose Satan's truth claims over God's, disobeyed God, bringing sin into the world and then the Bible gives us the rest of the story....

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree because now we are venturing into the whole "well-rounded" education topic which is an entirely different thread...;)

I'm not saying I would be suicidal if I found out Jesus was a hoax but I certainly would stop being a Christian (follower of Christ).

That is absolutely true. A good deed IS a good deed but it won't grant you salvation which is what legalism is all about. Legalism is attaching salvation to good deeds, sometimes as a prerequisite, sometimes as an on-going requirement. Our good deeds separate from Christ are "filthy rags" according to the bible. It is the righteousness of Christ that covers us and the grace of God that saves us. Telling someone if you choose to head cover or not drink alcohol or stay married to an abusive husband you are a true christian (or a 'better' christian) is legalistic. Likewise, telling someone they are NOT a christian if they drink alcohol or don't head cover or divorce their abusive husband is legalistic.

Well, my professor feels differently. :D The question came out of a discussion about TRUTH. Since we live in a post-modern, "truth is relative" sort of world it is a pretty relevant question. If there is no such thing as Truth, or if what is true for me is not necessarily true for you then are we putting our faith in a lie? (whatever faith that is?) So the question as it relates to me personally is "IF, hypothetically speaking, you had irrefutable proof that Jesus is not who He says He is, He is not the son of God, he was not resurrected, etc. would you still be a Christian?" My answer is no. Why would I follow a lie? The question is designed to get at the heart of WHY you believe not just WHAT you believe.

Right, that's why this is a hypothetical question...what if?

If you were presented with IRREFUTABLE PROOF that your religious/faith/beliefs were false, would you denounce your faith? For instance, if you found out that... - Jesus Christ is NOT the son of God - Mohammed was insane and had no part of the Quran - the Hindu Gods were really just fairytales etc. etc. Would you walk away from your faith? These questions came up in my apologetics course and I found them fascinating!

:iagree:

My point is it's not like that particular university is the only university aailable and therefore we need to make sure that they offer every kind of major to cater to every desire of every student. You don't go to law school to get a medical degree and you don't go to a school known for it's focus on western canon expecting to receive a multicultural education (or vice-versa). I would rather my children attend a school that specialiazed in what they want to major in than a school that is trying to be something to everyone.

yes!! Thank you!!!!!

What do you mean?

That made me laugh out loud for REAL. We have our administration meeting today and it is at the top of my list!

.

We are just looking at it from different angles. We are saved by faith alone. Nothing we did or can do contributes to our salvation so that we cannot boast. BUT because we are saved it expresses itself in our good works (not the other way around). Legalism is a matter of the heart. I can refuse to touch a drop of alcohol, wear only dresses, head cover, help the poor, etc. But that is not what saves me. Having been raised in a VERY legalistic church, I was taught that if I went to the movies, or a school dance, or wore make-up, etc. I was going straight to hell. Telling someone else "if you don't do this or that you are not a Christian" is legalism. Only Christ saves, not what we do or don't do.

:grouphug::grouphug::grouphug:

Well, the kids seem to find ways to make it mean all sorts of things but basically it is a phrase they use to express their displeasure about something or their dislike for something. For instance, I told them they could not kick the ball when they play "four-square" at recess because kids are getting hurt. The response? "That's gay!" Another instance, in class they were talking about movies they like. One student said they liked High School Musical and another kids said, "That's gay!" I HATE THAT PHRASE.

Wow, this is really a complicated issue. It seems that for every adoption situation there is a different range of feelings. My dh is adopted, has always known and has never even "blinked" about it. Seriously, he has no issues whatsoever about being adopted, no desire to locate his bio mom, actually forgets most of the time that he is adopted. But it is a little easier becuase there isn't the race issue. There is no way to NOT tell my ds he is adopted...he is Asian and we are not. What's funny is I have had people ACTUALLY ask me if we are going to tell him he is adopted. I was like, "Ummm....what?" I waffle between not wanting to turn it into a big issue if it isn't one but not minimizing it either. I don't know if that makes sense but...well...I don't want to talk all the time about him being adopted but I don't want to avoid the topic either. I don't want it to completely define who he is but I want to respect that it IS part of who he is. AHHHHH!!!!!! This is so HARD.

:lol::lol::lol: My dh would be the same way. He would NOT put up with our kids disrespecting me in such a way. Part of the problem is that it has become somewhat "acceptable" for kids to "rebel" and treat their parents with disrespect. We as parents "expect" it. That is a new generation thing because that would have NEVER flown in previous generations. If MY mom would have called HER mom that name...shudder....it would have happened ONCE. Just like I tried it too....ONCE.

I cannot describe how much I hate that phrase. Truly hate it. Unfortunately, because I am a principal I hear it ALL DAY. It seems to be the favorite phrase for kids to describe anything they don't like or don't agree with. Who came up with this ridiculous phrase? I'd like to punch them. I can deal with "That sucks!" better. Or even "WHATever". But if I hear "That's gay!" one more time I might seriously hurt someone. :rant:

I did the exact same thing at the exact same age and here's what happened: a. my mom slapped me (I know a lot of you will disagree but I think I really deserved it. It was the only time that ever happened) b. Since I was 15yo, it just happened to occur the summer I was to take driver's ed. Guess who did not get to take driver's ed? I had to wait an additional YEAR. c. guess who never called her mom a b*tch a gain?