Here is a simple question Letho; give three reasons why children should learn what y=mx+b is?

=brainbombº

Indeed. Whether things in the bible should be judged worthwhile and accepted or applied only to the extent they are decent, compassionate and rational. They need to stand on their own merits. Otherwise there is no reason to take the judgment of the dudes who sat down and made it all up any more than my own judgment.

1. Because it gives them a basic understanding about 1D geometry.
2. Because once they're in high school, and say, want to become a physicist, then not knowing y=mx+b is going to be really hard for them to go into most *any* science program.
3. Because it's useful in graphing models with 2 or more lines to optimize an outcome. Google "production possibility and comparative advantage"

"do you understand the term rhetorical?"

Yeah, it means you asked the question as an implicit argument, the terms of which I laid out above. The issue here is that not that I don't understand your argument, but that *you* don't understand your argument.

Similarly:
"Furthermore, just because you can read the bible doesn't mean you fully understand the bible anymore than a layman can fully understand what is written in law books"

If you're claiming that Biblical meaning is unknowable, then I consequently cannot claim to know what the Bible instructs, so I cannot use it as a guide at all. Otherwise, your argument does not give me a reason either to accept or reject the statements based on their being Biblical.

Your attempt to browbeat me with Biblical trivia and numerology is irrelevant to the discussion. After all, all you're saying is that the meaning is knowable and even known, i.e. that people have deciphered the meaning using their reason. Since the meaning is known, we are back where we started--either using our reason to decide whether to accept or reject the statements, or using something else. You have provided no reason for me to use something else.

I have little patience for the meandering hostility of your apologetics. Eventually this is going to wind back around to taking the Bible's word for it because it was inspired by the ineffable God. But I don't take that premise, so I have no reason to do so.

If the bible's meaning is unknowable then it is clearly badly written by a crapoy writer. I write a fair bit myself and if your audience can't clearly understand your point or take away some meaning, you've failed as a writer.

Interesting comment re authorship Ogion.

Most Westerners use modern translations when studying, which are grammatically checked. There is no issue with he standard of language used.

If there is an issue over meaning, then that is a matter of interpretation not linguistics. Very few Christians actually agree with their peers on all aspects of their faith - the very definition of a 'broad church' - just as there are enormous divides within the Muslim, Jewish and Sikh faiths.

However, those differences are really not much more significant that those in the Dip community who prefer gunboat to full press or PBEM to F2F, except when folks start saying that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

"Most of what I see about homosexuality is old testament. IS there any in the New Testament?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_New_Testament

"Here is a simple question Letho; give three reasons why children should learn what y=mx+b is?"

-Tommy runs faster than Veronica in PE, so the teacher has given Veronica a head start. How are you going to know whether or not the head start is fair? (Trick question, Tommy will never consider the head start to be fair, but it'll distract him from complaining about it.)
-I know you love playing those video games and tooling around with your computer, Bobby. Why don't you try making some? You'll have to learn some math, but I bet you can get Pong down in no time.
-Gosh, Haley, that's a big drop! Hey, if you dropped a rock from here, how fast do you think it'd be going when it hit the ground?

Yoyo go to the head of the class. there are more than three but you did well!!

you've failed as a writer.

or you are talking to the wrong audience.

@Letho

thanks

obviously Ogion has never heard of James Joyce

Letho, go talk to Yoyo and get your head straight

Also the idea that kids don't need to learn y=mx+b would have prevented stranger things from being a show, because they'd never be involved in the radio stuff together and they would have all died IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT??? ALSO IM A SPACEMAN

There is a lot more to good writing than just grammar. There is expressiveness, clarity, and a host of other mechanics. That's a very simplistic notion of what constitutes good writing. The world is awash in grammatically correct but terrible writing

I am still praying for you Ogion; also you Letho!

obviously Ogion has never heard of James Joyce, obviously!!

When y'all God botherers talk about a Bible, just which Bible do you refer to, as there are many competing Bibles ? They don't agree y'know. Personally I rate the Bible used by the church of the latter day Saints as being the most imaginative, least comprehensible, and most inconsistent. I have an "evangelical Baptist" Bible that's "right out there" in the "Looney tunes stakes"
Fortunately my Catholic Bible is a version that contains the Apocrypha, and it's fun to read the bits they tried to censor. Of course, and I am not objective about this, there's the reliable Church of England King James version Bible which is excellent if absolute monarchs appointed by God is your idea of the ideal political structure for Nation States, and you need decent propaganda to keep those rebellious peasants in their place. Then there's the "Bible " of the Seventh Day Adventists. Now for really wacky theological notions, look no further than those inventive Scientologists, they've got absolutely corker propaganda, and they market their products like the uber Capitalists they are.
May I offer an apology to the other various sects for omitting them & their Bibles in this litany of competing texts.
So, as I have remarked, just saying " the Bible " is inadequate, it's a generic term. A smidgin' of specificity is required from y'all God botherers.
It would be remiss of me to fail to mention the classic of the religious tomes, the Koran which I regard as the most cunning and cleverly timed publication of the lot. Disguising a political manifesto as a religious document is sheer genius. Machiavelli should be bright, burning green with envy, imltho ( in my less than humble opinion).
So as a devout, practising sinner and philanderer, it's a huge relief to have so many diverse versions of "God's word" available for those moments when I feel a need for spiritual advice, & may I thank all those religions and sects for their unceasing efforts to provide us consumers with the widest possible array of "theological" texts.

Spare us your passive-aggressive declarations of prayer, Brad.

You're talking about y=mx+b in order to argue that children should learn math even if they don't understand why they should be learning it, and (by analogy) that we should follow the Bible's dictates even if we don't understand them. But that's nonsense, because there are plenty of ways to explain why kids should learn math in a way that kids will understand. Your failure of imagination is not a strong argument.

I mean, that's not the *only* reason why your argument is nonsense, but it destroys the basic comparison made by the analogy, which is sufficient to refute it.

And Lethologica, Mathematics is logical, rational and consistent, imho. It's also wonderfully imaginative, I just love the imaginary numbers, like the square foot of minus one. Mathematics freed humanity from the ignorance imposed upon it by religions.
Consider just this. All these works purporting to be the word of God could have given humanity one simple warning regarding water borne diseases such as cholera, a simple "heads up gang, boil the water first before you drink it" bit of practical advice. You'd think, quite reasonably, that a benevolent loving God would have given us a better line than "punishment for sins" ( in a haphazard, ad hoc, inconsistent way, which necessitated the "God works in mysterious ways alibi )

*to argue that children should learn math even if they don't understand why they should be learning it

that is completely off the meaning. i see you have never taught math. when i taught math i had to not only help the child understand how it works by why it works and why it had meaning for them. in today's classrooms students want to know why they had to learn something they 'were never going to use'.

>Ogion: "Nobody has been [...] fired for cussing."

ahahahh
ahahahahaha
haahahaahahha
ahahahahahaahha
okay there, bro

"Mathematics freed humanity from the ignorance imposed upon it by religions. "

I strongly disagree with this. Mathematics is not in opposition to religion, and religion's historical relationship with knowledge and ignorance is, at the least, complicated.

with a moniker of logica, letho, you are clearly obtuse and concrete in your thinking. clearly there is more to this battle over the bible than argument over meaning. As to my imagination, try teaching physics to students bound for Berkeley and UCLA who come from south-central Los Angeles. Yes i taught that too. mys students were learning about the Higgs boson particle years before it was 'proven' to exist.

"that is completely off the meaning."

Then by all means, explain to us in what way mathematics is relevant to your apologetics, instead of intimating that I don't understand teaching while simultaneously explaining your teaching method in a way that suggests that my examples are just fine, thank you very much.

Clownie, way to blow right past the genocide and brutality caused by racism and sexism. That's frankly pretty damned vile and disgusting. Exactly what I'd expect.

sit in my classroom for a semester. i had to integrate math, science, economics, religion, speech, accounting, history and government (civics) in my teaching. i also found time to coach freshmen basketball and help varsity BB.

Okay, you're more interested in your indignation than the discussion. That's fine.