Class
Oh, I thought of something. Last night, I had my Religious Studies class. We were talking about the Book of Job and stuff, and all was well, until my ignorant teacher decided to be an arse. Okay, some student put up their hand and starting saying how the author of Job didn't mean for the Book to be factual, but merely metaphorical. I was half listening at this time, and this caught my attention. So I waited for my teacher to respond (being Catholic, I figured she'd disregard this comment and move one). But nnooooooo! She agreed! I was so stunned and disgusted, it's not even funny. This other guy who was sitting on the other side of the room and is obviously a Christian, was also horrified at this. We both kinda looked at each other and shook our heads. So, my Professor went on to explain how the Bible isn't completely historically accurate. And how only some of the books of the Bible are factual, where others are more like folklore. The other guy put up his hand and said, "so then that's like saying Jesus isn't historically accurate, but rather 'metaphorical'". My Professor responded, "no, Jesus was historically accurate". So then he asked, "then how do you know which books are and which aren't?" Professor: "it's a judgment call". What in the heck is that?? This made me SO mad, you cannot even understand. How can the Bible be a judgment call at what's historical and what's not? That's absolutely absurd. My Professor is now officially a moron to me, because I have no idea where she stand on anything and she's always jumping back and forth on things. It's odd.
Also, she was saying how "the Satan" in Job is not really Satan, but a being of heaven, or an angel or something. I think she's just pulling stuff out of her a** because I have no clue where she's getting this. She also was saying all this other stuff that was just so far from the truth and completely offensive to me. I couldn't believe it. If this stuff isn't making sense to you, then I'm sorry, I guess you would have had to be there to hear everything she said in order to grasp why I was so unsettled by this.
Also, she was saying how "the Satan" in Job is not really Satan, but a being of heaven, or an angel or something. I think she's just pulling stuff out of her a** because I have no clue where she's getting this. She also was saying all this other stuff that was just so far from the truth and completely offensive to me. I couldn't believe it. If this stuff isn't making sense to you, then I'm sorry, I guess you would have had to be there to hear everything she said in order to grasp why I was so unsettled by this.
6 Comments:
At 4:20 p.m.,
Mike said…
That's what happens when you look at the Bible as a historical document instead of as a unique act of divine communition. I'm not sure what critera your prof is using, but I doubt she's being totally random here. There's probably some coherent thought behind her position; why don't you ask her?
And the identify of the adversary in Job *is* in question. Nowhere else in the Bible does "satan" perform that roll, and no where else in the Bible does satan stand in heaven and have a chat with God. The adversary in the book of Job is an anomaly, and so some people think that it's an angel with a specific, non-evil roll to play. Remember, satan is a title, not a proper name.
And about professors having agendas. You'll have to explain further what you mean by that, because it sounds like you're saying an "agenda" is a bad thing.
If the prof had said "yes, the adversary in Job is the traditional Satan," wouldn't that have been an "agenda" too?
At 4:22 p.m.,
Mike said…
One more thing - am I not right to say that when you say "that person has an agenda," what you really mean is "that person disagrees with me?"
At 5:08 p.m.,
Aleah said…
I hope you're commenting on "agenda" refers to Jevant's comment because I don't believe I ever stated that.
And also, I believe I stand corrected because I looked it up and there's a footnote thing to the word Satan in Job, and it simply says accuser, so I'm guessing that's what it's referring to. My mistake. I still didn't like the way she spoke about it though.
At 6:40 p.m.,
Mike said…
Oh, yeah. I was responding to Joel with the agenda bit.
What exactly is the course about, anyways?
At 10:04 p.m.,
Aleah said…
The class is called Perplexing Issues and today in class she asked us what makes us (personally) go on living. She blabs on a lot, and it gets pretty repetative, so I usually only stay for half of it. But the readings are pretty interesting.
At 10:05 p.m.,
Aleah said…
The class is called Perplexing Issues and today in class she asked us what makes us (personally) go on living. She blabs on a lot, and it gets pretty repetative, so I usually only stay for half of it. But the readings are pretty interesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home