To refuse the offer of a bible from local church for dd to commemorate starting school?

[Norfolkbumpkin]

I have just received a round robin email from the school where dd has just started in reception. It says that as per the last few years the local church will be giving each child a bible to commemorate starting school, and to advise the office if for any reason you do not wish for your child to have one. I have replied saying no thanks as feel rather uncomfortable with this, but is this normal practice? I know that the school follows the standard guidelines for R.E. etc, but I am aware that the deputy head (who teaches one of the reception classes) is very active in the local church. She runs bible lessons after school one afternoon a week, and the church have an active presence at the school by doing the gardening in the flower beds and odd maintenance jobs. Am I reading too much into the bible thing or is it a tad pushy?

I haven't read the whole thread but think about this: you wouldn't call a child a Tory, or a socialist, even if you wanted them to have certain beliefs and you intended for them to follow that path. So why a Christian, or anything else? Giving a child a bible, to me, seems as absurd as giving them some political propaganda. I would decline.

I really do fail to see how it is "arrogant"

Really? To think you know better than the creator of the universe is not arrogant?

Crikey not back paddling at all... Pretty down the line, me.

I think Dawkins view of evolution and it's relation to God might JUST be a little different to the Church's views, which is, broadly, that evolution is the best explanation of the way things are that we have, but that it was God's idea.

And I find your assertion that bringing my children up aware of what their parents believe and why, because I'm a Christian, means I'm 'labelling' them, but an atheist, who, presumably is bringing their children up with an idea of what their parents believe and why, isn't 'labelling' them. It's all a bit of a bollocks argument. Sauce for the goose etc.

I get a bit defensive that the atheists/humanists often seem to always think they have a monopoly on rational thought and tolerance, and that anyone who has faith is either an idiot or a bigot or both. Thinking that it's not possible to look at the facts and come to a different conclusion is rather arrogant, no?

Jesus speaking on hell - well he doesn't go into much detail, actually, using old testament references mainly, which, as a Rabbi was the customary way to describe it. If you understand it as a metaphor trying to communicate their perception of a life without God then it's all a bit more complicated that "Join us or rot in hell" becomes 'Join us or face an eternity without God'. If you believe in God than that's the very worst thing you could think of, and you look for ways to try and communicate how awful you think that would be. If you have decided that you don't believe in God then it shouldn't really a problem for you.

The bible is metaphor, parable, poetry, tone-poem, letters, philosophical musings, prophesy, dreams all all sorts. Choosing to take every passage literally, whilst convenient, is stupid. Sadly some branches of Christianity are equally to blame for doing this as those who use the same approach to attack the faith.

And yes, a lot of the old testament is rendered null and void as we are under a 'new covenant'. Which is why I could, if I wanted, wear a poly-cotton bouse. I wouldn't though, because it would make me sweat. I do enjoy a bacon sarnie though. Same thing.

So no, I don't believe you can pick and choose, actually. But you can use your intelligence to work out what kind of literature you're reading, what the intention was at the time, what the historical context was, and how it applies today. And you can take the time to understand what the New Covenant means, what parts of the OT it supersedes and why.

But that all takes effort.

Short version for those that can't be arsed: The Bible - more complicated that you might think.

db
xx

Slaps head, you do know that some Christians don't believe God created the universe don't you...?

So when Jesus says 'If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched' people can say 'mistranslation, he didn't mean that' but when he says '?You shall love your neighbor as yourself' everyone nods and says 'absolutely'?

Ooh, clemett, I've got to make sure this thread stays on my active list now! Your post at 22:22 reads like a direct challenge to some highly articulate Mumsnetters, who do actually believe the bible is the word of god. I think at least one of them is a christian theologian. I love those threads!

I'm often surprised by the paucity of handless, one-eyed, one-footed christians, Giraffe.

The only way the Bible could be objective fact would be if it were the direct words of Jesus and given that it is a number of books, each giving a different or separate interpretation, written many years apart and then translated, retranslated and translated again, only the very extreme would argue that it is the "word of God" Ah, well on that I entirely agree. But, given those facts, on what basis have you decided that any of it's true?

If you don't like Wikipedia, OK.....

The Free Dictionary:1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.

1. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
2. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary

Merriam Webster:

: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world
2
a : a theological theory or system

b : a distinctive body of theological opinion
3
: a usually 4-year course of specialized religious training in a Roman Catholic major seminary

Oxford Dictionaries:

Definition of theology
noun (plural theologies)
[mass noun]
the study of the nature of God and religious belief:
a theology degree
religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed:
in Christian theology, God comes to be conceived as Father and Son
[count noun]:
a willingness to tolerate new theologie

Sorry, Clem tut in your patronising way all you like. You're wrong. Theology is the study of religion - so quite how have you decided that religion is based on it?

Slaps head, you do know that some Christians don't believe God created the universe don't you...?

Name one.

You could always get further than the first paragraph of wikipedia. In the next section you get:

Augustine of Hippo defined the Latin equivalent, theologia, as "reasoning or discussion concerning the Deity".

Which is talking or thinking about God.

No more complicated than that.

In fact that's what we're doing here, in a sense.

Quick, MNHQ, pull the thread before everyone gets INDOCTRINATED.

db
xx

Designer Er yes - God. God that is worshipped...you've got it....via a RELIGION!

Religion & belief in a deity came first. Sorry, but I'm astounded that anyone's trying to suggest otherwise. You appear to be confusing philosophy with theology, both of you.

The root of the word is "theos" (or something, can't recall) which means "God/gods". It's from there that we get theism/theology & even a-theism. Theology literally means "talking about god/the gods".

Crikey, I assume that you have read the whole thread and know that I am NOT a Christian ... But I am dead good at Latin.

As for a Christian who doesn't believe God created the universe - my husband (I just woke him up to check details of his interpretations - he is a dreadful cherry picker but is also a pretty nice man who is caring, tolerant and liberal so it doesn't seem t be doing anyone any harm.)

Designer

No, I think you'll find that the CofE & Dawkins (and every single biologist on Earth, btw) are pretty much of one mind about evolution - that it happened & explains the diversity of life on this planet. Where they may diverge is with regard to abiogenesis - what got life started. But that's actually a whole other subject and has nothing to do with evolution (other than that abiogenesis had to happen first).

Again - you are misunderstanding my argument & that of the Humanist campaign. That children are labeled as "Christian children, Muslim Children, Catholic children" is without question. Yes, I'm an atheist - but I never once said that my son was an atheist, or even that we are an atheist family. He was a Buddhist for about 3 years, although he's an atheist now. I have no idea what you call your children - and the campaign isn't actually about you, is it?

No, there's no "New Covenant". Jesus is the person that introduced the idea of Hell in the first place (wasn't even mentioned in the OT) & he quite explicitly said that all of the OT laws would remain in place until the Earth ceases to exist. I believe that the Earth is still here??

I don't think all Christians are bigots or stupid. I think the beliefs themselves are stupid and bigoted, yes. And so do most Christians, that's why they disown them.

Agree that God came first. (but I would wouldn't I!)

I think that Clement is suggesting that the plethora of religions and particularly denominations, are as much the result of hundreds of years of 'thinking about God' as they are the cause of it.

In which she has a point. For example, without theology we wouldn't have the shed loads of Christian denominations we (sadly) do. I love theology, and think it's necessary and desirable to examine what one believes and why. But it causes no end of hassle, frankly, because people are hell bent on trying to make sure everyone thinks they've got it 100% right.

And frankly, IMO the only person ever to do that would be Jesus. And He had an unfair advantage.

Theos is Greek, Clem - so perhaps your Latin needs some work.

I never said you were a Christian & I'm sure that your husband is perfectly lovely.

Although, admittedly, I think your "Slaps head" comment is so ridiculous I can't even be bothered to comment on it further.

Pssssst...."Deus" is latin for God. That's where we get "deity" from .

I think that Clement is suggesting that the plethora of religions and particularly denominations, are as much the result of hundreds of years of 'thinking about God' as they are the cause of it.

That's not actually what she said - not even close. If that's what she meant, then she needs to say what she means.

But anyway. Good night all :)

This is the problem with zealots on either side - they are so determined to prove a point they can't concede that the reality does not conform to their over-valued opinion. Whether or not it suits YOU and your argument, the reality is there are people who describe themselves as Christians who do not believe in lots of the Bible, so your argument is with a book, not with followers of a book, and that's pretty ridiculous in itself.

You asked at 22:32 why I thought any of the Bible was true; I don't, but I am fascinated by the myriad of different ways those wh do believe in it process their belief.

That, of course, is theoria as opposed to religio.

Chicken, as I said it is extreme to believe that the Bile is the literal word of God.

Crikey, I said very clearly that modern religion is based on years of theology. I think you were too busy looking things up on Wikpedia to notice.

Bible rather than Bile

"No, I think you'll find that the CofE & Dawkins (and every single biologist on Earth, btw) are pretty much of one mind about evolution" apart from the rather significant idea about who's idea it was/is.

I am probably misunderstanding the humanist camapign - because if I'm not labelling anyones kids, and you're not labelling anyone's kids, then who is this aimed at? I'm in the advertising buisness and it seems an ill-conceived concept to me. Wouldn't have made it past the first brainstorm anywhere I've worked.

FWIW my children won't identify themselves as Christian until the point when they decide, of their own free will, to 'confirm' their belief, either through confirmation or adult baptism.

"No, there's no "New Covenant". " Yes there is. That's Christianity 101.

"Jesus is the person that introduced the idea of Hell in the first place (wasn't even mentioned in the OT)." Bollocks. Google 'sheol'.

"He quite explicitly said that all of the OT laws would remain in place until the Earth ceases to exist." Context. Audience. Message & application. Also in the context of other stuff He said. but it's too late to go nto all that now. Suffice to say that's Christianity 102. Not stuff that Christian theologians are losing sleep over.

"I think the beliefs themselves are stupid and bigoted, yes. And so do most Christians, that's why they disown them." None of the ones I know. And I'd be willing to bet I know more than you do...

As for Clement - she can speak for herself, but I read "Religion is based on theology which is human interpretation of written and oral ideas. And humans interpret things in different ways. Hence the different denominations of all world religions." as saying pretty much what I said above...

Anyway, too late for theology.

Nighty night. Don't let the Christians bite.

db
xx