|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,838 Year: 4,095/9,624 Month: 966/974 Week: 293/286 Day: 14/40 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Which religion's creation story should be taught? | |||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
So here is the beginning outline to teach the Christian Creation Myths.
The Gods Story 1: source Genesis 1. This god is best described a competent, aloof, overarching, creating by an act of will alone; but separate from anything created, with no interaction, impersonal, ammoral. Story 2: source Genesis 2. This god is kind of a bumbler, hands on tinkerer, not very bright, unsure, working by trial and error, making mistakes but personal, involved, learning on the job. Then the teacher could go on to show the order of creation in each myth. Next the sub-plots found in the Genesis 2 myth could be covered. Edited by jar, : fix sub-title Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I think teaching many of the different creation myths is a great idea because each gives us some insight into how a particular people of a given era thought.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I believe what MexicanHotChocolate was asking is ‘should any of the creation stories/myths be specifically taught in science classes as scientifically plausible?’ Thank you for your interest,JRTjr Of course not. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I would love to get back to weather or not ‘Old Earth Creationism’ should be taught in science class; however, I am simply trying to give a reasonable response to the people whom have commented about what I have stated. No, no version of creationism should be taught in any science class. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Secondly is the myth that atheism is not taught in public schools; it is, under the guise of science; Macro-Evolution has been disproved as a scientifically plausible explanation for the existence, and proliferation of life; however, it is still taught as if it were ‘Fact1’ in science classes. The only reason that it is taught as if it were a fact, is because the atheists can not stomach anything that may even suggest that there may be a god; and they have craftily framed their religiously held beliefs in the language and mystique of science. So much in there that is simply not true it is hard to know where to start.
Secondly is the myth that atheism is not taught in public schools; it is, under the guise of science; Not true. Can you provide support for that assertions?
Macro-Evolution has been disproved as a scientifically plausible explanation for the existence, and proliferation of life; Not true and also another example of trying to misdirect the audience's attention while you palm the pea. Macro-evolution has not been disproved and it has NOTHING to do with the origin of life.
The only reason that it is taught as if it were a fact, is because the atheists can not stomach anything that may even suggest that there may be a god; and they have craftily framed their religiously held beliefs in the language and mystique of science. Yet more totally false statements and unsupported allegations. The fact that Evolution has happened and that the Theory of Evolution is the only model that has been presented and tested is taught in all but the Christian Cult of Ignorance schools. BUT, none of that is even relevant to the topic. There is NO Christian Creationist model that explains what we see. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If I go to a Court House, and am speaking to an individual about how this Country’s laws and heritage are Christian (are of Christian origin), and the Federal Government has forcibly removed all references of that Christian heritage then, yes, I have been hindered from worshiping my God because part of my Worship is to speak the TruthA. {Exodus 20: 16, Exod23: 1, Prov19: 9; 24: 28} This is a big part of why I participate in these discussions. I speak the Truth because I am compelled to by my devotion to my God. Except, of course, it is not a matter of Truth but only your belief. But it still has NOTHING to do with the topic. Is there any reason that one or more of the various Christian Creation myths should be taught? Is there any reason that one or more of the various other Creation myths should be taught? Edited by jar, : add last line Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Theodric writes: JRTjr writes:
If you want to state that Christianity is the basis of US law then it is. Whether or not the Declaration is a legal U.S. document is not really relevant to my point; I’m just curious. I think you need to go re-read the Decalogue to the US Constitution. Decalogue 20:2-17... 2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of England, out of the house of slavery; 3 Do not have any other gods before me.. . . Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
JRTjr writes: Jar writes: There is no "Christian Creation Story", in fact the Creation myths in the Bible are mutually exclusive. O.K.? Do Christian Creation Stories/Myths not exist: or do the ones that do exist contradict each other? It is hard to respond to your statements when you say two mutually exclusive things. If you read carefully you will see that I do not "say two mutually exclusive things." I say that there is no Christian Creation story. Note, that is singular. That is also a fact. Christianity, Islam and Judaism have several creation myths, the newer myth found in Genesis 1 and the much earlier primitive story found in Genesis 2&3. Two Creation myths. And they are mutually exclusive, if one is true then the other is false. Of course we know that neither one is factually correct, and both are refuted by the evidence of the universe itself. So the question is "Should we teach both of the Christian creation myths, and if so, is there any reason that we should not include a broad selection of other myths as well as the verifiable evidence that refutes all of them?" Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The thread begins with an assumption that religious creation myths can be taught.
quote: So the question is "Which religions creation myths should be taught?" The intent of the Founding Fathers is of course, irrelevant since we are talking about what should be taught today. For example we understand that the intent of the Founding Fathers was that a slave would be considered three fifths of a freeman. Even if the intent of the Founding Fathers was that the Christian Creation myths should be taught, we are dealing with today. The OP also specifies that creation myths should be in a comparative religion class, and so the issue of separation of Church and State is not an issue. So the question is, which Creation Myths should be taught? Should we include both of the Christian Creation myths and which other myths should be included to fill the coursework? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I'm sorry but does ANYTHING in your post have to do with what teh Genesis 1 account actually says, or with the mutually exclusive account in Genesis 2&3?
and again, what does that have to do with the topic or the issues raised in Message 234 quote: JRTjr writes: Yes, they could teach it that way if they were completely incompetent, and had done no research; or simply chose to lie outright about the Biblical account of creation. Actually, looking at what YOU propose as compared to what is actually in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2&3 I would let the audience decide which version is more likely a lie. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
First, instead of actually replying to the current state of the conversation you are simply going back and making assertions that have been addressed and refuted as though they were never addressed.
Classic Creationist tactic. But to address your rehash, something beginning does not mean that there was a beginner. You are simply wrong there. DNA is no more an information rich system than any other chemical molecule or reaction. Chemical reactions are not a sign of intelligence. Again, you are simply wrong.
I believe ‘Science’ should only be restrained by Facts, and Evidence. Not by what someone believes or wants to accept. If there is good and strong evidence to support a hypothesis, why should it be held back from our students? You have not provided any evidence to support any other hypothesis; there is no Creation model to teach. and now to catch you up on the conversation....
quote: Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
And as I pointed out to you in the very post you are replying to, even if they were true it has NOTHING to do with the topic which is "Which religions creation story should be taught?"
Edited by jar, : No reason given. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Except absolutely nothing in your post addresses the questions raised in the post you are replying to.
Let me repeat the questions and try yet again to see if you will answer.
quote: Nor is there ANYTHING of relevance or significance in Message 77 that is relevant to the topic. In addition there is nothing in your response related to science. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
JRTjr writes: Dear Jar, Great to hear from you again.
Jar writes: If you read carefully you will see that I do not "say two mutually exclusive things."I say that there is no Christian Creation story. Note, that is singular. That is also a fact. Christianity, Islam and Judaism have several creation myths, the newer myth found in Genesis 1 and the much earlier primitive story found in Genesis 2&3. Two Creation myths. And they are mutually exclusive, if one is true then the other is false. Of course we know that neither one is factually correct, and both are refuted by the evidence of the universe itself. Jar, please, listen to your self; first you say there is no Christian Creation story. Note, that is singular. That is also a fact. So, according to you, there is no Christian Creation story Then you say Christianity, Islam and Judaism have several creation myths (Stories) So which is it: ‘No Creation story/myth’ or ‘several Creation stories/myths’? Lastly, can you give me an example where Geneses Chapter 1 directly contradicts Chapters 2 or 3? Great fun sparring with you,JRTjr Learn to read. There is no single Christian/Muslim/Jewish Creation story (although the Qur'an does a much better job of smoothing out the inconsistencies and contradictions); there are at least two mutually exclusive creation myths. As to the contradictions between the newer fable found in Genesis 1 and the earlier fable found in Genesis 2&3, they differ in the order of creation, the method of creation and the very gods themselves. As the Rt. Rev. Bennett J. Sims, Episcopal Bishop of Atlanta in a Pastoral Statement on Creation and Evolution said:
quote: While both of the fable attribute creation to God, the descriptions of the two Gods are also mutually exclusive. The God found in Genesis one is competent, creates simply by an act of will, never hesitates, is never unsure, but is also separate, not interacting with the creations, aloof and apart. The much older God found in Genesis 2&3 though is entirely different, a hands on tinkerer, learning on the job, unsure, afraid but also intimate, personable, interacting directly and continuously with the creation. If the Christian Creation fables are taught it should be pointed out that they are simply myths, that they are mutually exclusive and that they were never meant as science and were both included in the bible because they were not factual but rather poetic and metaphorical. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
JRTjr writes:
Great; so why, IF Congress {The only branch of the Federal government charged will making law} may not make a law with reference to, relating to, referring to, in connection with, concerning, or regarding an establishment of religion is the Supreme court restricting the established Christian heritage of the United States of America?
It is NOT restricting it. People are free to teach such nonsense in their churches, in there private homes, in their private schools. You just can't teach such nonsense in the Public Schools. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024