Oh dear, was April Fools Day just referred to as something other than harmless? Oh dear. What is the world coming too?

As for the raising of hands, I don't do it at church. The only problem I have with it is the rare times I get slapped in the face by some excited worshipper's outstretched hands.

Okay, my science teacher was explaining the humans evolved from apes theory. Anyway this christian guy started having a fight with the guy next to him about it, the teacher wasn't able to finish because the fight was so bad. These two use to be really good friends. People shouldn't let religions come between them in this way.

Heh Heh!

Too bad the teacher didn't get a chance to finish, then some of the class might have learned that it's not the "humans evolved from apes" theory, but the "apes and humans share a common ancestor" theory .

Sounds like a "Teachable Moment" was missed. I would have sent both students home to write a twenty page essay on the current debate comparing the mountains of evidence for Natural Selection vs the rhetorical flourishes of Creation "Science".

GB

For raising hands in public, I don't really do it often unless the band is playing a song that tugs at me especially and I raise my hand because I want to. Otherwise, I'll just express my love to God in a different way.
I know how the feeling of people just doing to sound spiritual though- And that definitely is not genuine, emotional, or expressing your love to God. I'd rather people love God in their heart truthfully and act it in their every day life, than everyone raise their hands in chapel because it'll look Spiritual and they think it's a demand from God. Some people are wired in the way that their way to show reverence to God is to lift their hands up, and that's fine, but it's not disrespectful if one doesn't lift their hands, I think.

Interesting, ILF. You're right, people shouldn't let religions get in between friendships but they also shouldn't imply their religions on others in a pertinacious way.

On the topic of Creation vs. Evolution, I'm reading a book for school called Did Man Just Happen? Pretty interesting. We tend to look at it from the, "How could they believe such an absurd thing?!" point of view because they take big leaps of assumption, but they seem pretty shocked on the same point at us, too. Except that believing God created everything as it is now isn't an assumption, but they apparently think it's so.
It's pretty upsetting how they take a span of five hundred million years or whatever and so carefully chart out their theory, and it's accepted as real science. [/blabber]

Whew, so many things to discuss here, on the thread that I just discovered revived after about a month. 220, though we continue to disagree on many things, you have my respect, even before you successfully “resurrected” the thread — doing something even Easter didn’t do this year.

April Fool’s Day ... evolution ... worship ... very familiar territory for these discussions! First, I think I’ll quote what you said, IloveFauns:

Okay, my science teacher was explaining the humans evolved from apes theory. Anyway this christian guy started having a fight with the guy next to him about it, the teacher wasn’t able to finish because the fight was so bad. These two use to be really good friends. People shouldn’t let religions come between them in this way.

(In the voice of the Satan-like villain from “Doctor Who” series-2 episodes “The Impossible Planet”/”The Satan Pit”): ”Is that your religion?”

References to fantastic British sci-fi programmes aside, what you seem to have just done is the very same thing, Fauns. That is, you opposed people of two different religious views with your religious view, which says: people shouldn’t do that. Well, why not? I’m not necessarily agreeing that the Christian guy did everything right, but it’s also not right (I can show this from the Bible, God’s Word) to claim both of them were all wrong and that “people shouldn’t let religions come between them.” Is that your religion?

Please think about it. Also, some things are worth fighting for. Having the wrong beliefs on things hurts people, and worst, it slanders God, Who ought to be worshiped (whether with hands raised or not!).

I would have sent both students home to write a twenty page essay on the current debate comparing the mountains of evidence for Natural Selection vs the rhetorical flourishes of Creation “Science”.

Detention, Beard! And 30 points from Ravenclaw.

Creation-believers came up with the concept of natural selection. Creation-believers promote natural selection. And natural selection is not Evolution.

Documentation available upon request. Or Google it.

For now I’m dodging the raising-of-hands issue — that is, I won’t write a giant essay about it or something. However, here are a few points, and I think others have already been making some of them:

1) One must not have to raise hands to worship.
2) Raising hands in worship can be okay.
3) What is not okay is automatically looking down on someone who raises hands in worship, or looking down on someone who doesn’t.
4) Worship should encompass everything a Christian does (Col. 3:23).
5) Raising hands in worship can unfortunately be abused to draw attention to one’s self — just like anything a Christian uses in worship (ministry, art, music, writing, internet debate!). What matters is one’s heart. But any discussion of the virtues of raising hands, its Biblical precedent, and that sort of thing, should also include the risks associated with it — and the aforementioned other ways of worshiping God.
6) I’m married to a girl who would love to be able to worship God again with tambourines and even Messianic Jewish dance. However, I am not myself naturally expressive, and yet can worship God just as much as anyone who is more external. I hope I’m worshiping God now, even while not saying a thing, but only thinking as I write these words, hoping He uses them for His glory.

Now for the April Fool’s issue. 220, I hope to say this with all humility: one cannot discuss this without also recognizing that Jesus was Human and yes He did too laugh. He used hyperbole, sarcasm, analogies, and surely underwent a complete human experience. He is in Heaven now, just as God as He always was, yet He is also Man. We know God laughs — either in joy, or else (gulp) at the wicked.

(References available upon request.)

So, I’m glad you seem to be considering that, based on something you said in your previous April-Fools-related posts. Please also take note of my sister’s excccellent parody-in-advance on the topic, which she posted on April 1, 2008. You may recall WiseWoman mentioned this.

I actually think Lady Éowyn has built a better case against April Fooling — when she was quoting from actual Scripture verses — and yet in gentle jest! It was so good that someone I know well bought it all the way, thinking she was serious. Please, everyone, beware of doing the same! Here it is:

Well, this has been laying on my heart some time to say as spring has approached. I want to get it out and discuss it with you all, and I think this is probably the best place to do it. I’m a little emotional about this, so if I say something that sounds off, please let me know.

Now, I know many of you look forward to the first day of April. Put tacks on your co-workers chairs, hang spiders on the ceiling, etc.? But think about the name of the day for a second. April Fool’s Day. I won’t even go into the pagan history behind the day (I will say though, that Chaucer mentioned it in his Nun’s Priest’s Tale, and if you’ve read any of Chaucer, like I regrettably have, you’ll know that Chaucer is vulgar and lewd and should have no part of any Christian’s reading diet). I’ll just ask you: should Christians have anything to do with such foolishness? It’s such a dishonor to your family and friends, and even to the Bible.

The Bible is very clear on the fate of fools. “For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.” (Proverbs 1:32), “The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the promotion of fools.” (Proverbs 2:35), “A wise son maketh a glad father: but a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother.” (Proverbs 10:1) “He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed.” (Proverbs 13:20)

And maybe you’d say, well, you’re not being a fool, it’s just all in fun, making people look like fools. Well, as it says in the Bible, if you roll in the mud with the pigs you’re bound to get dirty. Consider Matthew 18:6 as well! “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

I think it’s grievous that our culture has strayed so far away from the truth that they celebrate fools and foolishness. You can see how they commercialize on it! Making money on the backs of people who are duped into doing it. Yes, they do make money. Have you ever seen the stands in Wal-Mart with the fake barf packets and as they call them “whoopie cushions”? And the worst of it is, I know a lot of Christians who gladly participate in it without any sign of conviction. It makes me very sad sometimes. “O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.” Proverbs 8:50. “Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding.” Proverbs 9:6.

“Fools make a mock at sin: but among the righteous there is favour.” Proverbs 14:9. Are you making a mock at sin today?

Well, I feel a lot better getting that out. I know some may disagree with me. I’ll be praying for you.

Bonus question: can someone pull an April Fool’s Day prank for the glory of God and even in worship of Him? I wonder if anyone else could describe a carefully plotted hoax someone pulled on them that ended up contributing to their positive relationship, along with giving great anecdote points.

Old Maid, I’m sure we’ve briefly discussed this before, but I do make room for nitpicking when people say that “we are brides of Christ.” The Church is Christ’s bride; I am not Christ’s bride. Yeah, it’s a nitpick, and most people who say that won’t fall into wrong ideas implying they’re more special to Jesus than other Christians, or whatever. But there are many anti-organized-Church memes floating around, and I wonder if over-personalizing the “bride” teaching may be doing some damage.

Old Maid, I’m sure we’ve briefly discussed this before, but I do make room for nitpicking when people say that “we are brides of Christ.” The Church is Christ’s bride; I am not Christ’s bride. Yeah, it’s a nitpick, and most people who say that won’t fall into wrong ideas implying they’re more special to Jesus than other Christians, or whatever. But there are many anti-organized-Church memes floating around, and I wonder if over-personalizing the “bride” teaching may be doing some damage.

Point taken, O Nitpicker In Chief. I was quoting "We are sons of God and Brides of Christ" from upthread & didn't quite clarify the difference.

I'm sure you remember a scene from one of your Very Favorite Books, which I mention here not because I have no life but because it's so dilly-dilly quotable. Anyone remember Irene Steele ("Left Behind") decribing "the Marriage of the Lamb" with the words God officiated at the wedding, and Henceforth He and the Bride are one, and the angels singing like the band at the wedding reception. They covered everything except "you may now kiss the bride." Do we have a good description of what the real meeting of the Bride and the Bridegroom will look like? I know we're promised joy and food, so far so good.

Actually I shouldn't have tripped over that sentence myself, given that one of my pet peeves is "Jesus is my boyfriend" praise songs.

It's interesting to note that many of our understandings of Hell and Heaven have been borrowed more from Plato's teachings (and incorporated into early Christian thinking) than the Bible. Also, more recently, Dante's 'Divine Comedy' probably had a big role in helping to form our ideas of the afterlife.

I agree that is very interesting. I didn't realize that so many people didn't consider heaven a physical place where people had physical bodies (apparently influenced by Plato). I have always thought of it as a physical place with physical bodies (that is when I thought about it at all). I'm really enjoying the book (it doesn't hurt that Lewis is quoted often and that a page was dedicated to describing a scene from SC). I'm having some problems with some of what he is saying (I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm just saying that I need time to process and research somethings more).

re: raising hands - Like many others have said, I just don't feel comfortable doing that (unless it is part of the motions of a song). I'm generally pretty shy and a quiet type, so such outward expressions of emotion don't appeal to me. I also don't tend to get excited.

re: April Fool's Day
I definitely think it depends on what kind of joke is being played and on whom. Before playing a "joke" one needs to consider:
1. The intended "victim" Is this person one who will get angry? Feel extremely embarrassed? Or take it in stride (as fun)
2. The motive behind the joke (Is it to be mean or just to have fun?)
Some jokes are obviously cruel and intended to hurt those should be avoided at all costs. I don’t see anything wrong with the joke a played on my sister (I put up four pieces of letter sized paper on her wall with “creepy” or “ugly” pictures. It would take her no time at all to remove them, and I had even told her of my intent several months ago (She said I would forget but it was she who forgot the whole conversation.). Even just doing that much, I was worried about making her angry. When I was considering taking part in a joke on a fellow NarniaWebber, I checked to make sure that he wouldn’t get angry. I don’t think there was any harm in this year’s NarniaWeb’s jokes. With a little thought and research, it wasn’t hard to figure out who was who and it was obvious that the mods were having fun with us. Now it the mods had completely switched identities say Mod A was posting under Mod B’s name from Mod B’s account that could cause some problems. The one that comes to mind is that Mod A might read things that were intended only for Mod B. Also, the Spare Oom joke was pretty harmless. Once the Threads, Threads, Everywhere topic was open, there was plenty of reason to doubt that the Spare Oom was really going to be reduced to four threads.

It depends on the tradition, and it depends on the April Fools' Day joke. Some are genuinely funny. Didn't Gandalf's Beard mention the BBC Spaghetti tree joke? That sort of thing is harmless, and all good fun. That BBC article was a sensation, even when I was a little girl. And April Fools' day is also a good way to laugh off genuine mistakes. Or a reminder of the need for vigilance in our daily routine. Did I mention that hubby, bless his heart, actually proposed to me on April Fools' Day?

I think the BBC’s joke was inappropriate since they are a professional organization and are supposed to present the news. (I think they ended up having the worse end of the joke since they got so many phone calls) Great point about the reminder! People need to examine things before they take them as truth (even things from “reliable” sources). So many people believe all that they see, hear, and read. When one falls for an April Fools’ Day joke, one should ask one’s self what that means about other things. I’d much rather have a day set aside for joking so I can be especially on my guard than have people pulling jokes whenever they feel like it. (Obviously some people will do pranks on other days but I think many people are more likely to do it on April Fools’ Day.) When jokes are played on April Fools’ Day, the jokers usually revel that it was a joke themselves, while false or misleading information on other days may never be revealed. (Advertisements come to mind). By the way, Wagga, did you wonder if your husband was playing a joke on you when he proposed?
It’s dinner time and my battery is dying so I have to stop.

Bonus question: can someone pull an April Fool’s Day prank for the glory of God and even in worship of Him? I wonder if anyone else could describe a carefully plotted hoax someone pulled on them that ended up contributing to their positive relationship, along with giving great anecdote points.

Er, didn't I say a few posts earlier that my dearest hubby actually proposed to me on April Fools' Day? On 1st April, 1970? And haven't I said somewhere on this forum, not necessarily in this thread, that on May 1st, in about three weeks, we will be married for thirty nine years?

Or, maybe I shouldn't have said it quite like that. He only asked me to pick out a friendship ring as we passed a jeweller's shop, a customary gift boys gave to girls they were seriously keen on. It was called 'going steady'. Siriusly! But by that time we'd passed the midday April 1st deadline we have in Australia, so I told him that if he wasn't serious, the joke was on him. I guess it was on both of us. We married thirteen months afterwards, on 1st May, 1971. If that isn't a positive relationship I don't know what is.

And it was planned. Hubby had every reason to know that I wasn't just going to marry a stranger I didn't know much about. Because I'd already said so. My parents' marriage had broken up when I was quite small, and for the rest of their lives they weren't on speaking terms, even to be civil. The nightmarish dream which led to the April 1st joke I played on myself was of both my Mum and Dad coming to visit at the same time as each other, and our having to bustle them out of the house whilst hubby's very disapproving mum sat on our lounge. It was such a vivid dream that I even looked for cars and taxis out of the bedroom window, as I woke up, and was very thankful that it was April 1st and only a dream.

I can't claim to be one who raises his hands during songtime at church, but I don't harbor any ill will towards those that do. If you feel the urge to do so, and if it's not being disrespectful (and isn't deflecting attention from worship) then more power to you. Like I said a few weeks ago, I'm there more for the sermon than anything else . Seems to be different for everyone.

Since we're in the middle of a hodge-podge of subjects in here there has been something I've noticed from time to time throughout my life. I've seen people often use highlighter pens on certain verses in their Bibles, or underlining others with ballpoint pens. Oftentimes they'll write commentary in the margins between the text and the edges of the page. Some of them got a little happy with the process to the point where almost every page had at least a dozen highlighted verses with several notes in the margins and it started to look (in my opinion) like grafitti like one would find on the sides of a subway car. I certainly understand the basis behind the occasional marking of certain verses, but by the same token I tend to look at it as defacing the Bible a little bit too...what are you thoughts on this?

I don't like the idea of defacing books, let alone Bibles BUT the Bible is made of paper, ink and cardboard. The content, the words and the spirit of of God's Word is what makes it so special. If it helps some believers to study the Bible and understand it, then I don't really have a problem with it. There's something much worse than a well-used, falling apart respectfully graffiti-ed Bible; a dusty rarely/never read Bible. At least that's my opinion.

Good points, W4J. Like I said, I'm not totally opposed to highlighting or marking a certain set number of passages, but I've seen some Bibles that end up looking like an old word search puzzle book. The most extreme case literally looked like grafitti, to the point where if certain verses had been highlighted/underlined the reasons for it were long lost to the owner (or anyone else who happened to try and read it). At that point the markings were more distraction than anything else...

Normally I'd suggest carring a dinky little spiral notebook to jot notes in, if need be, but the desire to keep everything together and the possibility of losing said notebook might be a bit too worrisome. I don't know...I guess it's just holdover teachings from my mom. When I asked her about it as a young kid she asked me "Would you write stuff all over the flag?". When I replied in the negative (flag etiquette and history were pounded into our heads at that age) she said "then don't do it to your Bible. Same principle applies".

I don't like the idea of defacing books, let alone Bibles BUT the Bible is made of paper, ink and cardboard. The content, the words and the spirit of of God's Word is what makes it so special. If it helps some believers to study the Bible and understand it, then I don't really have a problem with it. There's something much worse than a well-used, falling apart respectfully graffiti-ed Bible; a dusty rarely/never read Bible. At least that's my opinion.

Agreed, W4J . It all depends on if it is your own property or that of a library somewhere. As a librarian I have my own thoughts about book preservation, you see. When I had a surplus copy of the Bible in still good nick, I donated it to a library which didn't have one in stock and needed it. But that doesn't help me with this question. Because I have a Bible or two which by rights and by my professional training, I should really discard as outworn and unusable, but I am hesitant to do so for fear of being a little disrespectful of God's Word.

By the way, I was interested to learn that those of the Jewish faith, when faced with a similar problem with outworn copies of the Torah, bury the old copy with funeral rites as part of commissioning the new copy. Should I do something similar with my outworn bibles?

I don't tend to use highlighters in any book I possess and treasure, if only because I tend to pass on books to others if I can, to avoid a storage problem. Professional training again, I fear. And it doesn't do to give answers to new students, now does it?

In answer to some of the other hodge-podge of topics:

Yes I agree with you again W4J. If people want to wave their hands around, well that is their choice, so long as they don't poke someone in the eye as they do so.

5) Raising hands in worship can unfortunately be abused to draw attention to one’s self — just like anything a Christian uses in worship (ministry, art, music, writing, internet debate!).

Of course you are right. If Christians draw attention to themselves unwisely they can get shot. Fortunately not here, in Oz. We have gun laws, you see. And unity is strength, isn't it?

Detention, Beard! And 30 points from Ravenclaw.

Creation-believers came up with the concept of natural selection. Creation-believers promote natural selection. And natural selection is not Evolution.

Hate to burst your bubble, Doc, but really both ILF and Gandalf's Beard are right, not you. Because if it is true that Creation-believers are promoting natural selection then they are in a roundabout fashion promoting Evolution. Because Evolution depends on natural selection, ie life choices and adaptations in the face of adversity and selection of suitable partners, to make evolution work at all.

And ILF has every civil and civic right to post what she did, being entitled to an education under Australian law. It may not reflect her religious beliefs at all. And what happened to separation of church and state?

Australian cuckoos do what cuckoos do everywhere else, but here they prey on fairy wrens, a native species. Over several generations the cuckoo chicks have found out their best chance of survival is to mimic fairy wrens as much as possible, lest the fairy wrens get too wise and chuck them out. As fairy wrens have also learned to do.

Basically marriage and mating are extremely important. And so are your life choices, whatever creature of Our God and King we happen to be. It also matters whether one dies to help others survive or to spread destruction.

And ILF has every civil and civic right to post what she did, being entitled to an education under Australian law. It may not reflect her religious beliefs at all. And what happened to separation of church and state?

I don't think that Doc Ransom was saying anything about or relating to ILF's civic duties, nor was he denying her "right" to post her thoughts or feelings on the subject. He was merely explaining why the two other students were fighting, and then related it was likely that ILF's own religious feelings on the matter might be playing into her observations and conclusions about the other two. And I'm not really sure where the fabled (and too often misused) "separation of church and state" phrase came from or what it has to do with the topic at hand.

Heh Heh!

Too bad the teacher didn't get a chance to finish, then some of the class might have learned that it's not the "humans evolved from apes" theory, but the "apes and humans share a common ancestor" theory .

Sounds like a "Teachable Moment" was missed. I would have sent both students home to write a twenty page essay on the current debate comparing the mountains of evidence for Natural Selection vs the rhetorical flourishes of Creation "Science".

GB

I wanted him to finished because i found it quite interesting. I am not sure if i believe the ape theory but it was still interesting. 20 page essay might be a little extrem but getting them to write an essay would be a great suggestion for these problems.

Just a few brief comments because I have to leave for an all day fencing tournament to qualify for nationals.

I'm not one to mark my Bible either, but there is a particular Bible study style called Manuscript that requires it. Intervarsity highly promotes it, but they don't do it to thier actual Bibles. The purpose of Manuscript study is to have the entire passage visible at once via printed paper, so you can mark things of interest that would be several pages apart in your Bible and make connections. I personally don't sit too well with doing this as others do, because as some have said, you get to the point where you can't even read the original passage. In my Bible I have a bunch of papers stuffed in my Bible with my notes and comments.

Wagga, if you wanted to address Dr Ransom's comment on evolution, you might want to actually answer the question. You just said evolution requires natural selection, which it does among many other things, but never addressed his point about how creation also favors it. If something is pertinant to two sides of a debate, that something becomes transparent and cannot be used as evidence in either direction. But I will say this, evolution requires many more assumptions to be true than creation ever will and if one of those assumptions are found to be false (which I believe they have many times) the theory falls apart.

And finally 'Separation of Church and State' is found in a letter from Thomas Jefferson as he tried to explain the 1st Amendment. It was taken completely out of context as the Admendment clearly states the governemnt is to stay out of church affairs but says nothing about the church staying out of state affairs.