ANSWERING FOLLY: WHO IS A FOOL? — PART 2

James 3-13This post is the second in a series. For a list of posts in this series, please visit ANSWERING FOLLY: INTRODUCING THE TOPIC — PART 1.

The Purpose Of This Post

What is the point of this post? Supposedly, we intend to use the Bible to identify who among us are fools. In fact, the Bible does have much to say about fools and foolishness. If we search the New King James Version of the Bible for “fool,” we will get 196 hits. Those hits will, of course, include variations of the word such as foolish and fools. However, the word “wise” and variations occurs 220 times, and the word “wisdom” occurs 231 times. That’s because the Bible exists to teach us about wisdom, not how to be fools.

What does it mean to be wise? Consider how Proverbs begins.

Proverbs 1:1-7 New King James Version (NKJV)

The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel:

To know wisdom and instruction,
To perceive the words of understanding,
To receive the instruction of wisdom,
Justice, judgment, and equity;
To give prudence to the simple,
To the young man knowledge and discretion—
A wise man will hear and increase learning,
And a man of understanding will attain wise counsel,
To understand a proverb and an enigma,
The words of the wise and their riddles.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Note that ending. Fools despise wisdom and instruction. Foolishness is not due to ignorance; it rises out of the rejection of wisdom. To be wise must seek wisdom.

Consider how Ecclesiastes ends.

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 New King James Version (NKJV)

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:

Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
14 For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil.

The Bible calls King Solomon, the author of Ecclesiastes, the wisest man who ever lived. Ecclesiastes tells us tells of Solomon’s search for happiness of all the things he tried. As an old man, he wrote Ecclesiastes and concluded the matter. As wise as he was, Solomon did many foolish things — until he finally recognized the need to fear God and keep His commandments.

What Solomon’s experience suggests is that the Bible doesn’t necessarily exist to tell us who is a fool; it exists to help us avoid foolishness and being a fool. Thus, Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes. Instead of repeating his experiences, he wanted to encourage people to learn from his experiences.

Does that mean we should not identify and deal with fools? No.

Considering Other Views

Bob Deffinbaugh‘s View @ Bible.org

Matthew 5:22 cautions us against calling our brother a fool.

To call a brother a fool is to declare him to be worthless. If a man is but a fool, a blight on society, it would be better for all if he were dead. To conclude that one is worthless, then, is to come to the conclusion that the world would best be rid of him, which is but one short step from murder. Our Lord did not condemn the assessment of a person’s character, but the assassination of one’s character. (from here)

In his exposition of Proverbs 26:1-11 the author observes that:

  • TO ASSOCIATE WITH FOOLS IS BOTH UNWISE AND UNPLEASANT.
  • TO EMPLOY A FOOL IS A TRAGIC MISTAKE.
  • FOOLISHNESS IS INHERENT IN CHILDREN AND THEREFORE PARENTS MUST KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH FOLLY WHEN IT OCCURS.
  • FOOLS MUST BE DEALT WITH DIFFERENTLY THAN THOSE WHO ARE WISE.

Here are the problems with a fool.

  • THE FOOL IS UNRIGHTEOUS.
  • THE FOOL IS UNWISE.
  • THE FOOL IS UNREALISTIC.
  • THE FOOL IS UNDISCIPLINED.
  • THE FOOL IS UNRELIABLE.
  • THE FOOL IS UNTEACHABLE.
  • THE FOOL IS UNPLEASANT, UNLIKED, AND UNDESIRABLE.

Quoting from multiple books in the Bible, but focusing on Proverbs, the author makes it clear that we must distinguish between the wise and the foolish.

How does the Bible describe a fool? @ GotQuestions.org

What is the ultimate fool?

The ultimate description of a fool is one who “says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good” (Psalm 14:1;53:1). Although fools can choose to become wise by heeding wise counsel and applying it (Proverbs 8:5;21:11), the Bible warns against associating with fools (Proverbs 14:7).Proverbs 13:20says, “Walk with the wise and become wise, for a companion of fools suffers harm.”(from here)

Nevertheless, we should not casually call someone a fool.

There is an important distinction between the biblical definition of a fool and the word Jesus used (raca) in Matthew 5:22when He forbade calling a Christian brother a “fool.” The term raca, spoken from a heart of contempt, implied utter worthlessness. Jesus was not saying that we cannot call the choices of another foolish. But to call someone “raca” was saying that this person was beyond the reach of God and therefore condemned forever. To say, “You fool!” to a brother or sister in that day was the equivalent of saying, “Damn you!” to someone today. We do not have the power or the right to condemn anyone to hell. (from here)

Can we call someone a fool or not? @ CARM.org

Instead of describing a fool, this article focuses on whether or not it is ever appropriate to call someone a fool.

When Jesus said in Matthew 5:22 that you should not call anyone a fool, contextually He was speaking of those who were unrighteously angry.  That is why Jesus mentions anger in this verse.  There is a righteous anger which is not sinful (Eph. 4:26 – “Be angry and do not sin . . .” ), as well as unrighteous anger that is sinful (James 1:20  – “for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God”).  When God is angry with someone, He is always righteous in His anger.  Jesus, being God in flesh (John 1:1,14; 20:28; Col. 2:9), can righteously be angry with people and pronounce upon them the foolishness of their deeds–which He did (Matt. 23:17).  Also, undoubtedly, Jesus knew Psalm 14:1 which says, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’ . . .” Jesus didn’t forget the well known verse, and God is not wrong for calling someone a fool, especially when it is true. (from here)

What are five types of fools?Institute in Basic Life Principles

This article references Bible verses to describe different types of fools.

  • The Simple Fool: The simple fool opens his mind to any passing thought and opens his arms to any passing stranger. In other words, he lacks discernment. He has an over-simplified view of life and fails to recognize the cause-and-effect sequences that affect every area of life. (See Proverbs 22:3.)
  • The Silly Fool: A silly fool believes that his own way of thinking is right (see Proverbs 12:15), so much so that he reacts to instruction when it is offered: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools [’eviyl] despise wisdom and instruction” (Proverbs 1:7; see also Proverbs 10:21).
  • The Sensual Fool: The sensual fool’s focus is on that which brings him immediate pleasure. He glories in that of which he should be ashamed.“It is as sport to a fool [kecîyl] to do mischief … ” (Proverbs 10:23; see also Proverbs 13:19–20).
  • The Scorning Fool: This type of fool not only has rejected truth; he also has embraced that which is abominable to God. Psalm 1:1 describes the progression of foolishness, referring to a man who first walks “in the counsel of the ungodly,” then stands “in the way of sinners,” and finally sits “in the seat of the scornful [lûwts].”
  • The Steadfast Fool: A steadfast fool totally rejects God and His ways. “The fool [nâbâl] hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good”(Psalm 14:1). This type of fool is self-confident and close-minded. He is his own god, freely gratifying his lower nature. It is his goal to draw as many others as possible into his evil ways.

The list of the different types of fools looks correct. However, there appears to be some disagreement (see here, here, and here). Since I cannot read the Bible in the languages in which it was originally written, that’s a technical dispute beyond my competence.

What Should We Conclude?

Of course we should believe in God. At least that is what God Himself indicated when he described Job to Satan with these words.

Job 1:8 New King James Version (NKJV)

Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?”

Nevertheless, it seems that by Biblical standards someone can disbelieve in God and still not be a fool. Consider what Psalm 14:1 says.

Psalm 14:1 New King James Version (NKJV)

There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.

In addition to disbelief in God, to be a fool a man must do what is wrong. Therefore, if an Atheist or an Agnostic is not committing abominable works, just because they say they don’t believe in God does not give us sufficient cause to berate them.  If they are willing to listen, we can speak of God to such people, but whether they listen or not there is still no point in treating who behave well as if they do not.

More On The Definition Of A Fool

Modern Examples Of Foolishness

82 thoughts on “ANSWERING FOLLY: WHO IS A FOOL? — PART 2

  1. Thanks for the link brother. And for the post as well. I had been watching the thread on callinfg people fools…having all the info together is great. The work you do to put these things together is amazing and appreciated.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hey Wally:

      CT’s putting these posts together is off the charts, a lot of good wisdom and info, knowing too that such truths come with a price, as many adversaries travel far and wide to assail or find fault with his premises.

      To be linked here is special indeed, and I am with you in appreciation..

      Liked by 2 people

      1. ColorStorm, you are so correct. Lot of work goes into these, a LOT of work. It’s almost art to tell the truth. And the discussions…wow. I have seen some amazing ones.

        Tom, you keep fighting the good fight, brother; you seem very well armed

        Liked by 2 people

  2. The King James version of the New Testament was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England. There were not (and still are not) any original texts to translate. The two oldest manuscripts available were penned hundreds of years after the last apostle allegedly died; they contain 3,036 conflicting textual variations and do not mention a resurrection in the earliest written gospel. That part was secretly added to copies generations later. There were over 8,000 copies of the copies of the copies made, producing a story so blindingly contradictory that “Christians count 133 contrary opinions of different authorities concerning the year the Messiah appeared on earth” (Encyclopaedia Britannica).

    ….But that doesn’t matter.

    The King James translators didn’t refer to any of these manuscripts, anyway.
    Instead, they edited previous translations of the corrupted documents to create an entirely new bible which the King and Parliament would approve of.

    In other words, 21st Century Christians believe the “Word of God” is a book edited in the 17th Century from tainted 16th Century translations of 8,000 contradictory copies of contaminated 4th Century scrolls that claim to be copies of secretly falsified (lost) letters possibly first written (at the earliest) in the last years of the 1st Century regarding a gnostic character who lived perhaps two or even three generations earlier… but who no historian, social commentator, court record keeper, curious onlooker or graffiti artist along the entire eastern Mediterranean seaboard apparently noticed during his supposed life.

    Is this what Christians mean by Faith? 😉

    —-

    Note from the resident blogger


    Should you decide to reply to John Zande, I expect you will eventually discover what most of the people who have taken the time to debate him have discovered. It is amusing only for a little while.

    If you take the time carefully investigate some of his “facts,” you will soon decide the rest of his claims are unworthy of being taken seriously.

    Like

    1. John, you seriously need to do your homework. Arguments concerning so-called contradictions, translations, nuances, manuscripts, languages, errors, etc. have been addressed and settled time and time again. Come up with something original for once. Geesh. There is nothing new under the sun.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Beg to differ. There were 54 people appointed to translate for the KJV 1611 AV. Those 54 were broken into six companies: 2 at Oxford, 2 at Cambridge, and 2 at Westminster. These groups worked from the Hebrew Mosaretic, Syriac, Greek & Latin manuscripts tapping Erasmus’ collection of Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, also consulting earlier English translations (Wycliff, Tyndale, Coverdale) and most likely the Geneva Bible, although the objective was to produce an English translation void of commentary such as the Geneva. The work began in 1604.

      As far as historians or extra-biblical commentators in the Mediterranean, read Josephus and Philo.

      But you’ve made up your mind already.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. One of the things I love about the first (?) edition of the KJV was the ‘oops’ moment when writing out the commandments and they missed the ‘not’ when it came to adultery.
          I wonder if this was god-inspired as well? 😉

          Like

        2. What a strange comment.

          I would in fact urge all readers to read the last post and peruse the thread in great detail to see Tom’s evasion tactics when asked a frightfully simple question:

          Name something new or original (or even marginally useful) said of done by Jesus.

          Like

      1. Beg to differ all you like.

        Josephus is an interpolation. Please see the seminal church historian of 3rd and 4th Century Christianity, Eusebius of Caesarea, for resonance of where that extract comes from…. Eusebius, who titled the 32nd chapter of the 12th book of his Evangelical Preparation, “How it may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine for the benefit of those who want to be deceived.” Or how about another Christian, the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther (1483—1546), spoke of the necessary lie, the useful and helpful and strong lie deployed for the greater good of the church, or the the 5th Century Christian theologian and bishop of Constantinople, John Chrysostom, who articulated the benefits of deceit in Book 1 of his Treatise On The Priesthood:

        “Do you see the advantage of deceit?… For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind… And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived.”

        Like

        1. @John Zande, you are being utterly deceitful. Perhaps you’ve convinced yourself that this is acceptable and appropriate when dealing with people you disdain, but once again you are massively distorting scholarly data and opinion regarding Flavius Josephus and Eusebius, just as you did with the King James Bible creation process. Both of these I was readily familiar with.

          What do you do; haunt websites that discuss Christianity until you see some crank that agrees with you and use his statements as facts in these arguments?

          You don’t care at all about the truth, do you? This is sad; you are making non-theists look like lying curmudgeons by association. You appear to be simply trolling to amuse yourself. But you have convinced me to not bother at all researching anything more that you offer that I was not already knowledgeable about, since your track record so far is zero for each one I have checked out or known about.

          I have dealt with the rare creationist who was a lying troll, knowing that he was lying: He would admit that he was wrong, but would shortly thereafter be touting the same lie again in another forum. Most creationists are simply misled by such people. You are acting exactly like those in the former category, except without even the saving grace, so to speak, of admitting that your information is wrong. You almost did, once, back in the discussion of “Nature’s God” — but then tried to blow that off as not mattering to you and your point. This was a harbinger of your later pattern of moving goalposts.

          ==============/ Keith DeHavelle

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Hi Keith

          And thanks for your appraisal.

          What do you do; haunt websites that discuss Christianity until you see some crank that agrees with you and use his statements as facts in these arguments?

          Um, no Keith. As you are already aware, Tom posted a hunk of my work, which I challenged him on. He invited me to his blog. I had to “approve” the link. I’d never visited before. I have since hit “Follow,” so your position is in clear error.

          Now, are you doubting that the absolute majority of biblical scholars acknowledge the TF was an interpolation attributed to Eusebius? That would be quite the declaration. I’d be interested to hear if you’re willing to stand by this declaration…

          Now, it seems to me that you have an awful lot invested in your Tea Party roots, and have taken serious offense to me pointing out to you how others in the world see this confused movement. “Cranks and Crazies.” I’m sorry, but that is how you have come across, but I can appreciate if that opinion has been deemed offensive to you. I can appreciate that you believe you’re doing good work… None of that, though, is of interest to me, and you’d be doing yourself a favour to stop trying to drag me into your political views. I’m just not interested. It’s hard, after all, to take the likes of Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Gary North, and Glenn Beck seriously. Now, I’m not saying you should stop what you’re doing. Go for it. Knock yourself out. Corporatism killed Capitalism (and Democracy) in your country decades ago, and efforts should be made to rectify that abhorrent reality. Buy every book Bachmann, Palin, North, and Beck put on sale if you like. I just don’t care. I wish you, however, all well. I’ve travelled America quite extensively, and have only good opinions about your countrymen. Tom says he’s in Virginia, and I actually spent some months in western Virginia. Loved it. I have no complaints. You’re a good people who mean well. I don’t doubt that.

          I hope that’s clear.

          Like

        3. Finding error or contradiction in the works of scholars is not difficult if you read enough of their works. Martin Luther was an anti-Semite, Eusebius was a key figure in Constantine’s merger of church and state, etc.

          I would even venture to say such a swarthy “scholar” such as John Zande could be found committing error and hypocrisy should his massive works be examined, and especially should all regard to context be thrown to the wind.

          Quite surprised that Dr. Zande has not provided a link to his publisher for the ignorant of humanity to revel in his massive intellect and omniscience, actually.

          Indeed…

          Liked by 1 person

    3. Given the nature of your comments and “facts,” it seems to me you deserve a special “honor.”

      Henceforth I will append this tag to your comments.

      —-

      Note from the resident blogger


      Should you decide to reply to John Zande, I expect you will eventually discover what most of the people who have taken the time to debate him have discovered. It is amusing only for a little while.

      If you take the time carefully investigate some of his “facts,” you will soon decide the rest of his claims are unworthy of being taken seriously.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Hi Tom

        So are you going to actually identify any error on my part? You’re quite fond of levelling these accusations, but never quite as keen to back them up. If I recall, i did ask you, numerous times, to substantiate your recent claim that “I made things up”…

        Did you ever back up your accusation?

        Of course you didn’t. You didn’t, because you couldn’t. It’s really that simple, so I think its good if you encourage people investigate what I write.

        I’d encourage it.

        I will urge it, in fact, because that will only strengthen what I write 😉

        I’d also like them to follow our most recent thread, linked here above. I believe that paints a somewhat accurate picture of your “accusations.”

        So, thank you. This can only be a positive for your readers.

        —-

        Note from the resident blogger


        Should you decide to reply to John Zande, I expect you will eventually discover what most of the people who have taken the time to debate him have discovered. It is amusing only for a little while.

        If you take the time carefully investigate some of his “facts,” you will soon decide the rest of his claims are unworthy of being taken seriously.

        Like

  3. I really like this series you’re doing. Perhaps there is difference between being foolish and being a fool? Telling people when they are being foolish can be an act of love, where as labeling them a fool sounds more like condemnation. I know that several times in my life, it was people brave enough to point out the truth to me that really changed my life forever. We’re all more than capable of being foolish about something.

    I am all about mercy and being gentle with people, but sometimes I worry that we’ve gone too far in the other direction. Too tolerate or ignore foolishness isn’t exactly a loving thing to do.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Does this mean, Tom, that you’re willing to accept the “correction” that Moses and Abraham weren’t historical characters? That Egypt, Exodus and Conquest are all myth? 😉

        Like

        1. John

          You have reached the point where you are behaving like a pathetic troll. Has it occurred to you that you are just exhibiting the sort of behavior this post is about?

          Read the post carefully. Consider the different types of fools. Which one fits your behavior? Is that what you want?

          When we are willing to study it carefully, we find the Bible mirrors our character. That is true of everyone. You are no exception.

          Like

        2. OK, I accept that was a little naughty, but you did say “gracefully accept advice and correction,” and as far as I can recall, I have done my very best to gently inform you of the facts concerning the Pentateuch.

          Alas, I’ll leave this thread alone. You will come around to the historical reality when you’re ready, I’m sure.

          Like

  4. Hi Tom, Thanks for the interesting post on fools. I especially appreciate your statement….

    “Therefore, if an Atheist or an Agnostic is not committing abominable works, just because they say they don’t believe in God does not give us sufficient cause to berate them”

    How very true. There are those who are willing to seek out the truth concerning God’s existence… may we all be ready to share with them the truth with a kind concerned spirit of Godliness. A gracious, loving attitude towards those who are blinded by sin is much more effective than a critical, mean spiritied response that comes from a heart of arrogance.

    Lord bless you!

    Like

      1. Hi Arkenaten,

        To share the truth of God’s existence, I simply ask that a person examines the complexities of nature with an open mind; examine the Scriptures with the same mind that is open to the possiblity of God’s existence; and also share with them what my Lord has done for me personally…
        He has intervened in my life showing me my sinful condtion, my need of a Savior, and the source of forgiveness Jesus Christ and His work on the cross for His people. I also share how He continues to intervene in my life blessing me with an abundance of daily blessings, His protection and supplying my every need as well as His leading and guinding me through His Word.

        Yes, God does exist, there is no doubt about it! May the Lord bless you!

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I am not going to start to enter into a debate with you, because I fully admit that I can never debate and talk you into believing in the true God that is found in His Word.
          I have shared with you how you can come to a knowledge of His existence through nature, the Word and the ersomal experiences of His people.
          The rest is up to you. Are you willingly to open your mind to the possibility that God exists? If so, as you examine the above areas, my prayer is that the Lord will lead you to the truth of His existence and bring you to Himself. Lord bless you my friend. I will be praying for you.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. What is strange about people like Arkenaten is that they actually believe they can force others to believe what they believe. What happens in practice? What happens when the Arkenatens of the world badger, pressure, and eventually insist upon trying to force others to believe what they believe? The violence of their words and deeds spread chaos and ignorance.

          Liked by 2 people

      2. @Arkenaten

        When you start calling Jesus names, I will delete your comments. If you call others who post here names, I will just delete your comments. If you continue to insist upon behaving like a troll, I will send your comments to the spam queue.

        As it is, you add no value. Make a nuisance of yourself, and I will treat you as a nuisance.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. What is strange about people like Arkenaten is that they actually believe they can force others to believe what they believe.

    Maybe if you simply asked instead of blowing smoke out of your backside I would tell you what I believe?
    But if you truly believe any atheist thinks he will convert an indoctrinated person such as you then you are not only naive but ignorant to the core.

    I simply challenge the erroneous and fallacious posts that certain Christians put up on the internet.
    It is your inalienable right as an adult to believe whatever you wish and I would never want to restrict this right no matter how mind bending nuts I thought you were. If i were to believe this then befor long I would begin to behave just like the religious. How silly would that be? I might as well throw my lot in woth your crowd and accept all the crap you believe in.

    However this right you are entitled to also extends to children and those who are unable to defend themselves against inculcation and indoctrination and does not extend to you believing you can impose your religious belief – note the word, belief – on society in general and children in particular.
    That is intolerable.

    If you keep your unsubstantiated faith to yourself or within the confines of a non-proselytizing community then you would find pretty much no complaints from atheists such as me.
    You would probably still get stick from other religions, but not from this quarter, I can assure you.

    Like

    1. @Arkenaten

      What you just said only reinforces the statement you tried to refute. Consider what you just proposed.
      1. You want to take other people’s children, and you want to force feed them what you believe.
      2. To keep you happy, Christians have to practice their faith in private. Effectively, you want to restrict freedom of speech.

      There is an ethical issue. Like it or not, Nature’s God put parents in charge of bringing children into the world and raising them.

      There is a practical problem. Because nobody in his right mind would trust politicians to decide what children should be taught about God and morality, we must put parents, not government, in charge of teaching what to believe about God and morality.

      There is a matter of indifference. Given what you want, I don’t care to make you happy.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Your religion is a proselytizing religion. Your rights are protected. This does not mean you get to infringe on the same rights of others based on an unsubstantiated belief, especially as you insist the punishment for non-belief is eternal damnation.
        This is tantamount to hate speech and with any other topic would be considered actionable.
        I did not say you have to practice it in private but in a non proselytizing environment.

        As for teaching children. Sure they can be exposed to religion but as they are exposed to any other subject. And ensure they learn about all religions but are not taught that one religion is superior to another or that one holds truth while the others are false.
        This you should have no right to promote.
        A child should be free from religious indoctrination of any sort.

        There is a practical problem. Because nobody in his right mind would trust politicians to decide what children should be taught about God and morality

        Wrong first step out the blocks.We do trust politicians in this regard which is why Creationism is not taught in public schools.
        However, it is taught in certain Private schools such as ACE and this is morally reprehensible and in countries such as the UK people like Johnny Scaramanga are pushing government to make such schooling illegal – and rightfully so!

        Practically, evangelical religion is already suffering considerable losses each year, as it is within the professional ranks of pastors and ministers, and, according to PEW research looks like it is heading to a situation where those numbers will not be replaced.

        As the Rolling Stones once sang, Time is on my side.

        Like

        1. @Arkenaten

          Christians are not suppose to teach Christianity to their children, and they are not suppose to spread the Gospel. Effectively, you are saying that what other people believe is hate speech, and it has to stop.

          The public school system is a socialist system, and Socialism does not work. To think it will is to be blind to the fact Socialism never has worked.

          Because it is a Socialist system, our public school system exists to serve politicians and teacher’s unions, not children. When people just hand their money over to politicians, they lose control. Instead of children providing the education their parents want them to receive, politicians spend that money for political and personal gains. Since the teachers unions serve as the biggest special interest with respect to education, they tend to get what they want.

          Anyway, thanks for further piling up the evidence.

          Like

  6. Christians are not suppose to teach Christianity to their children, and they are not suppose to spread the Gospel. Effectively, you are saying that what other people believe is hate speech, and it has to stop.

    I am saying is by Christians stating ( at the highest level) that non-belief will result in eternal damnation is tantamount to hate speech. To indoctrinate this into children should be considered abuse.
    And if it were possible to legislate against this doctrine would support it.

    As it is obvious you feel so strongly about the value of ”free speech ” and especially truth, then why not push to have Islam taught as truth in schools. Muslims consider their religion is even more truthful than yours, as it was dictated <em< directly to the prophet Mohammed. pb whatever by the Angel Gabriel.

    The public school system is a socialist system, and Socialism does not work. To think it will is to be blind to the fact Socialism never has worked.

    An unsubstantiated and rather silly comment. And I hope you weren’t assuming I was simply referring to the education system in your country, Tom?

    Like

    1. @Arkenaten
      All you have said substantiates what I said.

      What is strange about people like Arkenaten is that they actually believe they can force others to believe what they believe. What happens in practice? What happens when the Arkenatens of the world badger, pressure, and eventually insist upon trying to force others to believe what they believe? The violence of their words and deeds spread chaos and ignorance.

      When parents cannot pass on their beliefs to their children, freedom of religion becomes meaningless, and that is true regardless of the religious belief. The fact that some religious beliefs, such as yours, does not support freedom of religion is separate issue.

      With respect to Socialism, where has it succeeded? Do you know of an example? Given enough time, every Socialist system flops.

      Like

      1. No; freedom of religion means this should apply to the children as well. Why should adults be given a Free Pass simply because they kids are there’s?
        You would object if they were being taught Nazism would you not?
        So afford children the same level of respect you expect as an adult.

        I dont have any religious belief, so let’s not get silly, Tom, all right?

        With respect to Socialism, where has it succeeded? Do you know of an example? Given enough time, every Socialist system flops.

        Your reference was specifically to public schooling which you referred to as socialist.
        Not a socialist government state.
        If you would like to rephrase you initial statement I will respond, no problem.

        Like

        1. If I didn’t know better, Tom I would suspect you might be baiting me in the hope I might stoop to calling you names?
          Naughty Tom. Not playing nice.
          I shall tell mummy on you.

          Like

        2. @Arkenaten,
          You are a time waster, pretending ignorance.

          You are also rude, and you have no respect for the rights of others. If you want to insult the Bible and Jesus — if you want to make a general pest of yourself — I will treat you as a pest.

          Further comments from you are going into the spam queue. No apologies. No regrets.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. I assume this situation you describe about “when parents cannot pass on their beliefs to their children. . . . etc.” is a hypothetical, non-real world condition, at least in the United States. I don’t know of any parents who aren’t free to try to pass on their beliefs (although children, particularly ones in their teens. can often be a bit stubborn about accepting them).I even know some parents who teach the silliest things to their children without let or hindrance from anyone other than, perhaps, the children’s own growing knowledge and analytical abilities.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. We have discussed this before. The last time I check the public school system promoted secularism.

          You also know as well as I do that taxing people to pay for the public school system creates a burden. That burden forces people to either send their children to “free” public schools or to do without something else they want or even need. If you don’t think so, you are welcome to pay my taxes for me. After all, taxes are no big deal.

          Like

      1. And now you stoop to silly behaviour like this?
        Well, tis your blog, no one can prevent you from responding in whatever manner you see fit.
        Those that read will decide for themselves I suppose.
        Enjoy.

        Like

      2. I looked back and didn’t find Arkenaten insulting Jesus or calling Him names, certainly not in this thread. You made that up, didn’t you, Tom? I wish you wouldn’t do that. It diminishes you.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. Hi Ark

      I think we both know Tom won’t furnish you with actual “evidence” supporting his accusation. Seems he likes to make the claims, but then retreats into silence when challenged.

      I’m still waiting for him to enlighten me as to where, precisely, I “made things up”

      —-

      Note from the resident blogger

      Should you decide to reply to John Zande, I expect you will eventually discover what most of the people who have taken the time to debate him have discovered. It is amusing only for a little while.

      If you take the time carefully investigate some of his “facts,” you will soon decide the rest of his claims are unworthy of being taken seriously.

      Like

      1. I was quite surprised. Yes I have been known to ‘go to town’ as the saying goes, but my comments here have been pretty straight laced.
        Maybe I missed something? Can you see / remember on any of these threads where I may have called Jesus of Nazareth ‘names” and I reiterate I presume Tom means some pejorative form.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. No, I can’t recall you doing so, nor do I remember you ever calling Jesus names on any thread, so I guess we’ll both just have to wait to see if Tom will rise to the occasion and back his claim up….

          —-

          Note from the resident blogger

          Should you decide to reply to John Zande, I expect you will eventually discover what most of the people who have taken the time to debate him have discovered. It is amusing only for a little while.

          If you take the time carefully investigate some of his “facts,” you will soon decide the rest of his claims are unworthy of being taken seriously.

          Like

  7. Tom – the public school system in America is intended to be a non-religious institution, as you note. That’s one of the very great things about America’s constitutional system and our willingness to protect religion against government interference, debasement, corruption, and degradation. But how does that in any way interfere with parents’ ability to try to instill religious values in their children? As I mentioned above, I’ve never known anyone with kids who was prevented or hindered in their religious instruction (maybe there are some crazy outlier things like active cannibal of cannibis cults where the safety of the children comes into play – but those are exceptions). If, as your stated rationale seems to suggest, that “cannot pass on their beliefs to their children” because of the existence of public schools, I would think you would view the only solution as a parent being able to go down to the school building during the day and teach religion to his kid at that site. What is the point of that? Why not just do it at home before or after school? Or, better yet, set an example in day-by-day living?

    Like

    1. You did not reply to the issues I raised. https://citizentom.com/2015/02/21/answering-folly-who-is-a-fool-part-2/#comment-57575

      You just pretended those issues don’t exist.

      Let me put it to you this way. The public school system is about power. To ensure children receive an education, the government does not have to run a secular school system. So why are we doing it? When a perfectly good private option exists, government-run anything is always more expensive. Government-run anything also infringes upon the People’s right to choose for themselves. Since government has the right to levy taxes, we don’t get a choice about paying. Whether we use what the government offers or not, we still have to pay.

      Do people have a right to choose how they educate their children? Does our government-run education system interfere with that right? Of course, it does. If you still have to pay regardless, you don’t have funds you could have used to exercise your own preference. So the only issue here is why you insist upon pretending otherwise? What a pitiful thing to do!

      Like

      1. My experience (and I doubt that it is atypical) is that it costs nothing to pass on beliefs and principles to one’s children. It sounds to me as if you are being hyperbolic in your complaints about restraints on parents’ abilities to provide moral guidance to their children. I do not believe such restraints exist (perhaps at the margins – for example if parents’ moral beliefs are acts of human sacrifice or some such extreme hypothetical). I think your real complaint is that you don’t like paying local taxes to support public schools. I guess none of us does at some level, but we all get benefits, whether or not we have children in those schools. If you can rally a majority of voters to abolish public schools in your area, you can perhaps do away with public schools there. I think, however, that most voters perceive that there are benefits to a well-regarded public school system and would be loathe to do without it.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. You just made the typical argument for bigger and bigger and bigger government. I suppose you also think the public school system is giving children an excellent civic education.

          Even if Socialism was not immoral (It is just a fancy way of stealing.), it is horribly impractical. When we operate within a system that respects private property rights (such as the free enterprise system), each of takes responsibility for our own conduct and providing for ourselves. Then when we encounter problems, we rely upon the honest generosity of our neighbors. When we operate within a system where all property is shared jointly (such as a Socialist system), each of must take responsibility for everyone else’s conduct and providing for everyone else. That is, the more the government does, the more the average citizen has to know about how the government works and what the government is doing. Otherwise, we cannot keep the rascals who run this country from robbing us and enslaving us.

          Like

        2. @scout, who wrote: “My experience (and I doubt that it is atypical) is that it costs nothing to pass on beliefs and principles to one’s children.”

          But the competition is that you also pay tens of thousands of dollars a year in tuition for others to pass on statist, negative, progressive beliefs to your children. The federal government is currently engaged in expanding their ability to do this effectively at the K-12 level, where currently it is quite powerful mostly at the college level.

          At the K-12 part of the process, it generally costs taxpayers only thousands of dollars per year, not tens of thousands. But this cost is redistributed to the small portion of the citizenry who pay net positive taxes. The federal usurpation of student loans for college is to accomplish the same sort of redistribution, by moving this burden onto the taxpayers rather than the students themselves.

          But money aside, the beliefs and principles being taught (and with Common Core, this is being pushed into grade school) are generally poisonous to the United States as a nation of one people, independent, and independent of race, creed or religion.

          You may attempt to pass on your beliefs, and your patriotism (I obviously don’t mean you personally) and many are successful at it. But most lose this battle, largely because the youth have more waking exposure and cultural connection to the school environment.

          It is “cool” to believe that the founders of the United States were oppressive white men bent on domination of those around them, and that the United States is and has always been a nation of unfairness, mistreatment, and inequality, harmful to the planet, that deserves to lose its too-high standing in the world.

          ==============/ Keith DeHavelle

          Liked by 1 person

  8. Keith – It’s true that I’ve paid (as has everyone else) a ton of money for education of my kids (and other people’s children as well). I can’t speak for everyone (nor can you), but my kids (one who went to religious, private schools and one who went to public schools) were not bludgeoned by “statist, negative, progressive beliefs.” They learned math, science, languages, history, literature, etc. And as you acknowledge, I and many of my peers feel we have had no difficulty passing on strong patriotic values to our children.

    I’m sure that there are places where it is considered “cool” to think ill of aspects of US history (I think specifically of the early 1970s on many university campuses). There are also places where one can objectively come to the conclusion that there are instances of “unfairness, mistreatment, and inequality” in the history of this country. But there are also many places and individuals that view these objective instances of shortcoming as the exceptions that prove the higher principle – that the United States is a country that can learn from its mistakes and that its bedrock principles and values are a force for good in the world.

    Like

    1. You talked past Keith’s points too.

      With Common Core and a nationalized education system, we won’t have to worry about variation between public school systems. They will all be bad.

      Consider that the Federal budget is almost twice that of state and local budgets combined. How did that happen? It is in the Constitution. Really?

      Where in the Constitution is authorization for a Dept of Ed? It isn’t there, but that is not stopping our leaders from nationalizing what should be purely private concerns.

      Unless there is clear abuse involved, it is not my business to tell you how to educate your children, and it is not your business to tell me how to educate mine. Yet unless we get rid of our socialist public education system there will be no stopping leaders from taking our money from us and using that money to educate our children “for us.”

      Please get it through your head. Taxation is not a trivial matter. When people refuse to pay their taxes, uniformed gentlemen with guns visit their houses.

      Like

  9. Tom – your last comment makes no sense whatsoever. You know perfectly well that I am no champion of the quality of public education in this country. It is completely variable, ranging from excellent to abysmal. I have acknowledged this many times before. My disagreement with you is that I do not see a system of public education as a usurpation of familial obligations to transmit cultural and religious values. Anyone who would surrender those obligations to government operatives can’t be much of a parent.

    When you and the other guy who forms your “we” ricochet off into the hypothetical world of socialism, you are talking about something that is not within my realm of experience. I have lived and worked in countries that have more widespread governmental involvement than does this one, but my comments here are based on living in the United States. If you want to talk about particular cases, name the country. There is tremendous variation even between countries that have some degree of “socialist” programs. Some work better than others, some fail completely, and some are more inclined to use socialism as a hammer to suppress thought and ideas than others. If we’re going to go down that road (although I think it a distraction here) let’s be specific.

    Like

    1. scout – When our nation was founded, the Federal Government remained a small concern for years, and state and local government did not educate children, but most people could read, and the only thing they had to read was the Bible and pamphlets like the one Thomas Paine published.. Now? Why don’t you go look up the stats?
      http://fee.org/freeman/detail/education-in-colonial-america
      http://www.answers.com/Q/What_was_the_literacy_rate_in_1776
      http://freakonomics.com/2011/09/01/were-colonial-americans-more-literate-than-americans-today/
      http://edci815s12.wikispaces.com/History+of+Early+American+Education

      Then, because people did not have so much help from the government, they were fabulously rich in comparison to the rest of the world.
      http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303561504577496620544901322

      Like

Comments are closed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

Victory Girls Blog

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Through Ink & Image

...Pursuing a God Inspired Life

Oh Lord, It's Monday!

Understanding The Bible In A Way That Transforms You And Your World

D. Patrick Collins

liberating christian thought

Musings Of An Imaginary Billionaire

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Way Online

Christian Insight Through God's Word

Conservative Government

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Night Wind

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Reclaim Our Republic

Knowledge Is Power

John Branyan

something funny is occurring

In Saner Thought

"It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error"..Thomas Paine

Christians in Motion

Why be stagnant?

SGM

Faithful servants never retire. You can retire from your career, but you will never retire from serving God. – Rick Warren

Communio

"Behold, I have come to do your will, O God." Heb. 10:7

All Along the Watchtower

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you ... John 13:34

The Sheriff of Nottingham in Prince William County

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Bull Elephant

Conservative and libertarian news, analysis, and entertainment

Always On Watch: Semper Vigilans

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Family Foundation Blog - The Family Foundation

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Cry and Howl

Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off. I Kings 20:11

Dr. Luis C. Almeida

Professor Of Communication

praythroughhistory

Heal the past. Free the present. Bless the future.

Dr. Lloyd Stebbins

Deliberate Joy

Lillie-Put

The place where you can find out what Lillie thinks

He Hath Said

is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort; let it dwell in you richly, as a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life

partneringwitheagles

WHENEVER ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS (LIFE,LIBERTY,AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS) IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT, AND TO INSTITUTE A NEW GOVERNMENT...

PUMABydesign001's Blog

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.

nebraskaenergyobserver

The view from the Anglosphere

Freedom Through Empowerment

Taking ownership of your life brings power to make needed changes. True freedom begins with reliance on God to guide this process and provide what you need.

bluebird of bitterness

The opinions expressed are those of the author. You go get your own opinions.

Pacific Paratrooper

This WordPress.com site is Pacific War era information

The Isaiah 53:5 Project

Life: the time God gives you to determine how you spend eternity

altruistico

People Healing People

THE RIVER WALK

Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

My Daily Musing

With God we will gain the victory, and he will trample our enemies. Psalms 109:13

atimetoshare.me

My Walk, His Way - daily inspiration

Nickel Boy Graphics

Comic Strips (Some Funny, Some Serious)

Rudy u Martinka

What the world needs now in addition to love is wisdom

Truth in Palmyra

By Wally Fry

Kingdom Pastor

Living Freely In God's Kingdom

The Life Project

Finding Clear and Simple Faith

In My Father's House

"...that where I am you may be also." Jn.14:3

cookiecrumbstoliveby

Life through the eyes of "cookie"

The Lions Den

"Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture." ColorStorm

%d bloggers like this: