Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
76 online now:
AZPaul3, jar, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Theodoric (5 members, 71 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,324 Year: 4,436/6,534 Month: 650/900 Week: 174/182 Day: 7/47 Hour: 3/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which religion's creation story should be taught?
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 237 of 331 (589503)
11-03-2010 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by Dr Adequate
09-12-2010 11:50 PM


What Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, had to say
Dear Dr Adequate,

Dr Adequate writes:

“As has been pointed out, that was Washington.”

I do apologize for this oversight. You are correct it was President Gorge Washington and not President Thomas Jefferson. I have made the correction on post #180.

Dr Adequate writes:

“But while we're on the subject, let's hear what Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, had to say”

You may also want to read my post #149.

Thank you again for your participation,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2010 11:50 PM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 238 of 331 (589505)
11-03-2010 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by hooah212002
09-30-2010 5:10 PM


Myths, Legends, Science??
Dear Hooah212002,

Hooah212002 writes:

“Mythical stories do not belong in science class. End of discussion. They are not scientific.”

So, the Komodo Dragon should be kept out of science classes; It has been a mythical creature longer then it has been known to science?

How about, the Mountain Gorilla long thought by scientists to be nothing more then a myth.

Or, Giant Squid, the Giant Panda, etc.

All of these creatures have been, at one time or another, considered pure myths until someone found one.

So, just because something is a myth, does that automatically disqualify it for scientific investigation?

And, how about the Creation account that has evidence to support it. Do we just ignore the evidence simply because it supports what some call a ‘mythical’ Creation account?

Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by hooah212002, posted 09-30-2010 5:10 PM hooah212002 has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-03-2010 4:31 AM JRTjr has seen this message

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 239 of 331 (589506)
11-03-2010 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by hooah212002
09-30-2010 5:34 PM


Re: Banning religious symbols is freedom of religion?
Dear Hooah212002,

Hooah212002 writes:

“Take a better look at the rest of the definitions there smart guy.”

The rest of the definitions do not apply; that in no way changes the fact that, by definition, 'Atheism' is a religion. What more is there to say?

Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by hooah212002, posted 09-30-2010 5:34 PM hooah212002 has seen this message

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 240 of 331 (589509)
11-03-2010 1:57 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by jar
10-01-2010 12:58 PM


Re: Atheism!?!?
Dear Jar,

Jar writes:

“No, no version of creationism should be taught in any science class.”

So, no evidence that may even allude to creation should be allowed in public school; Right?

Should we yank the ‘Big Bang’ theory? If the universe had a beginning it had a beginner. That sounds an awful lot like creationism to me.

Or maybe we should not teach about DNA. DNA is passed on from parent to child and insures that the child will be of the same species as the parents. (Unless altered by mankind) DNA is also an information rich system; Information transmission is the hallmark of intelligence; sounds an awful lot like a Creator to me.

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?

Thank you for your comments,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by jar, posted 10-01-2010 12:58 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Rrhain, posted 11-03-2010 3:22 AM JRTjr has replied
 Message 246 by jar, posted 11-03-2010 10:32 AM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 250 of 331 (589699)
11-03-2010 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Omnivorous
10-01-2010 1:14 PM


Old Earth Creationism is working in Sunday Schools!?!?
Dear Omnivorous,

Yes, Old Earth Creationism is working in Sunday Schools; vary well; thanks for asking.

However, the focus of this string is “If we are to teach creation in public schools, which creation story should we teach?

Hope to hear from you again soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Omnivorous, posted 10-01-2010 1:14 PM Omnivorous has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by frako, posted 11-04-2010 5:56 AM JRTjr has seen this message

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 251 of 331 (589701)
11-03-2010 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by bluegenes
10-01-2010 1:33 PM


Re: Atheism!?!? + Jainism
Dear Bluegenes,

Bluegenes writes:

“{Atheists} also yours.”

Not mine, I did not come up with the definition; nor did I tell them what to say or think. I simply quoted what they themselves have said. I you’re not happy with there definitions or ideas I’m sure they would not mind you giving them your two cense.

Bluegenes writes:

“The "divine foot" is not kept out of the door a priori. It is not included in science because no such thing has ever been observed directly or indirectly.”

Well, that’s a find opinion; if you have any facts to discus, I would love to correspond with you.

Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by bluegenes, posted 10-01-2010 1:33 PM bluegenes has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-04-2010 6:55 AM JRTjr has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 252 of 331 (589702)
11-03-2010 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Dr Adequate
10-01-2010 1:40 PM


Conversation all rapped up!?!?
Dear Dr Adequate,

“Can you provide some context for your quote?
Of course not...”

I love when someone asks me a question and, presuming I can’t answer it myself, proceed to answer it for me.

Since you seam to have this conversation all rapped up; I’ll let you do both sides of it.

Enjoy ;-},
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-01-2010 1:40 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-04-2010 6:49 AM JRTjr has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 253 of 331 (589703)
11-03-2010 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Coragyps
10-01-2010 2:12 PM


Re: The religion of Atheism !?!?!?
Dear Coragyps,

Coragyps writes:

“Start us a new thread to present that "proof," {That Macro-Evolution has been disproved} JRT. I seem to have missed it.”

Love to, I’ll propose it and then shoot off an e-mail to you when/if it gets approved.

Hope to see you there,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Coragyps, posted 10-01-2010 2:12 PM Coragyps has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 258 of 331 (590144)
11-06-2010 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by jar
10-01-2010 2:17 PM


Re: The religion of Atheism !?!?!?
Dear Jar,

Great to hear from you again.

JRTjr writes:

“Secondly is the myth that atheism is not taught in public schools; it is, under the guise of science;”

Jar writes:

Not true. Can you provide support for that assertion?

Are you asking if I have supporting facts for my assertion? or just rejecting what I said out of hand?

As to my “‘Macro-evolution’ is a Myth” statement.

I have given evidence in these strings that “Macro-evolution” is a Myth, and not scientifically plausible; and all I’ve seen from the other side is there accusations, scorn, and complains about my motives.

I state ‘Facts’, and they just say “Not so” and think that should be the end of it.

Well, Not so!

If what I say is so easily disproved then bring it on!

Show me where, in public schools in America today, that the scientific evidence for a Creator is taught; and I will recant my statement that: “atheism is taught in public schools under the guise of science;”

Show me where ‘Macro-evolution’ explains the Cambrian explosion, the fact that speciation has dropped to practically zero cense the end of the Cambrian explosion, how completely different and new organs, and organisms can just appear under Macro-evolution’s watchful eye; and a myriad of other things I, as of yet, have not heard a reasonable evolutionary‘’ explanation for; and I will recant my “‘Macro-evolution’ is a Myth” statement.

Disprove the “Christian Creationist model” explained in the book ‘Creation as Science’; and I will accept your statement that “There is NO Christian Creationist model that explains what we see.

Until then, I’ll stick by what I have said.

Thank you , and I hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by jar, posted 10-01-2010 2:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by jar, posted 11-06-2010 11:28 AM JRTjr has seen this message
 Message 277 by Larni, posted 11-11-2010 10:33 AM JRTjr has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 259 of 331 (590151)
11-06-2010 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by Coyote
10-01-2010 2:25 PM


Re: The religion of Atheism !?!?!?
Dear Coyote,

Coyote writes:

“Atheism is the absence of religion, the opposite of religion. Creationists love to claim it is a religion, but that's just another thing they are wrong about.”

Apparently you did not go to my original statement and read the definitions I gave in support of my supposition that “Atheism a religion”

I’ll re-post them here for you:

Religion, according to ‘Dictionary.Com’ is:

2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. The body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

6. Something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice. (Dictionary.com Unabridged. Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.)

Atheists hold to a “specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon” mainly that there is no god; and, yes, they hold to that idea religiously. ;-}

Coyote writes:

“Evolution is a fact, and there is nothing creationists can do about that other than complain.”

Constantly repeating a lie does not make it true.

I can also play the whine game: Creation is a fact, and there is nothing Atheists can do about that other than ‘complain’ about it.

Coyote writes:

“the theory of evolution… explains facts and has led to the discovery of new facts through accurate predictions.”

Even bad “theories” can explains some of the facts and lead to new discoveries; and I do not argue that, it is the myriad of other facts that ‘Macro-Evolution’ can’t explain, and that make “Macro-Evolution” impossible that cause me to denounce it as scientifically plausible.

JRTjr writes:

“As far as what should be taught in public schools; ‘Facts’ should be taught in science classes, ‘Comparative religions’ in Social Studies, Etc.”

Coyote writes:

“Are you aware that facts by themselves have no meaning? You need theories to organize those facts and to explain them.”

Ya, Coyote, that’s Called ‘Science’. So, if the theory does not explain all of the known facts it must be adjusted; if to many of the facts dispute a given theory it must be discarded and another theory that supports more of the facts should be put in its place.

The facts point, vary strongly, toward life being designed, created {Creationism}; not a series of ‘just so’ ‘accidental’ happy ‘coincidences’ that just happen to look orchestrated {Atheism}.

Hope to hear from you again,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Coyote, posted 10-01-2010 2:25 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Rrhain, posted 11-06-2010 9:38 PM JRTjr has seen this message
 Message 262 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-06-2010 11:48 PM JRTjr has seen this message
 Message 263 by Coyote, posted 11-07-2010 12:17 AM JRTjr has seen this message

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 264 of 331 (590308)
11-07-2010 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Omnivorous
10-01-2010 2:47 PM


Re: Stop the funny fonts
Dear Omnivorous,

Omnivorous writes:

“ What's with the funny fonts and colors…, please stop.

…Readable text will serve if you have words worth reading; all the fancy italics and colors in the world won't help if you don't.”

Agreed, yes, for you, I will not use anymore “funny fonts”. Others have asked if I would not use colors in my posts; and, as with them, I am more then happy to concede.

Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Omnivorous, posted 10-01-2010 2:47 PM Omnivorous has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 265 of 331 (590309)
11-07-2010 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Nij
10-01-2010 9:15 PM


Re: The "religion" of atheism
Dear Nij,

“{because you'll either ignore or dance around this point, I'll say it now}
Yeah, didn't think you could.”

As I said to Dr. Adequte: I love it when someone asks me a question and, presuming I can’t answer it myself, proceed to answer it for me.

Since you seam to have this conversation all rapped up; I’ll let you do both sides of it.

Enjoy ;-},
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Nij, posted 10-01-2010 9:15 PM Nij has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-07-2010 10:57 PM JRTjr has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 266 of 331 (590310)
11-07-2010 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Dr Adequate
10-01-2010 9:25 PM


It is, but it isn’t !?!?!?
Dear Dr Adequate,

Dr Adequate writes:

“The judiciary have (rightly) agreed to treat atheism as a religion for the purposes of interpreting the First Amendment.”

So, let me see if I understand what you're saying. I want to make absolutely certain I’m not putting words into your mouth.

You’re saying that the Government “judiciary” treats ‘atheism’ as “a religion”; and even though you agree with that; it, in no way, makes ‘atheism’ a ‘religion’?

You agree is should be treated as “a religion”; but not called “a religion” even though it fits the definition of “a religion”?

Have I got it right this time?

Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr

Edited by JRTjr, : Minor editing


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-01-2010 9:25 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by bluescat48, posted 11-07-2010 5:09 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 272 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-07-2010 10:16 PM JRTjr has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 267 of 331 (590318)
11-07-2010 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by Strongbow
10-08-2010 9:39 AM


I concur!
Dear Strongbow,

I concur with your statement wholeheartedly.

As we get into our late twenties and grow older, we tend to ‘lock it’ our beliefs; and when something comes along to challenge those beliefs our tendency is to cling to our cherished beliefs that much harder. This seams universal across religions, races, upbringings, etc.

I was faceted with one of those ‘accept the facts and change your beliefs’ or ‘cling to your beliefs and work around the facts’ problems about fifteen years ago {I am now 42}. I chose to accept the facts and adjust what I accepted as true accordingly.

I believe that everyone should be open to adjusting what they accept as true (what they believe) when faced with new evidence.

That is also part of the reason I participate in these discussions. If I come across some evidence that makes me question what I thought to be true I can examine it more closely and adjust my beliefs accordingly.

I hope you are enjoying our discussions, and I pray you will continue to participate,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Strongbow, posted 10-08-2010 9:39 AM Strongbow has taken no action

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 3545 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 269 of 331 (590336)
11-07-2010 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by jar
10-26-2010 1:20 PM


Avoiding Your Question??
Dear Jar,

I’m sorry; however, I am not avoiding the question.

I answered that question in message #77. I stated that “To make the determination of which…{Creation Stories} should be taught in science classes would require us to decide which one(s) come closest to fitting all of the available scientific facts, and evidence… Not just a statement of an opinion.

Unfortunately, we are told from the time we enter school until we graduate collage that Evolution is the only scientifically plausible explanation for the existence of everything we see.

We also know that if you tell a lie long enough most people will eventually believe it; and children are more susceptible to believing lies then adults are.

So even when a scientifically plausible explanation comes along, and is presented, more often then not, it is rejected out of hand. Not on its lack of scientific plausibility; rather because it does not fit the ideas and notions already accepted by peers of the establishment.”

In other words, to put it as succinctly as I can; the evidence should be examined without bias, and the theory that supports as many of the known facts, with out ignoring any, should be the one that is taught in school no matter it’s religious ramifications.

Thank you,
JRTjr


This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by jar, posted 10-26-2010 1:20 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by jar, posted 11-07-2010 5:58 PM JRTjr has seen this message
 Message 271 by Coyote, posted 11-07-2010 6:06 PM JRTjr has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022