Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,606 Year: 4,863/9,624 Month: 211/427 Week: 21/103 Day: 1/9 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 174 of 2073 (671309)
08-24-2012 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Dr Adequate
08-10-2010 7:53 PM


Hello doctor A,...
The thing about teaching is that enthusiam and interest helps so much when the subject grasps the attention of the students.
Teaching Evolution in the classroom with a comparison to what is said in Genesis is not teaching religion.
Teaching what the various churches say they understand from their private interpretation of Genesis would be teaching religion in the classroom.
This seems to be very different situations.
For instance, if, verse by verse, a teacher examined what is read in Genesis and compared it to ideas expressed in Science, we would find that the Big Bang did represent the beginning, that moment from which Science claims the Cosmos began to materialize into what we see today.
Time began ticking 13.5 billion years ago.
prior to 1940, that was an openended question, and Genesis was clearly stating that the Universe had not always been there.
That was a very confident and vulnerable position to have taken 3362 years, when that claim was written literally in Stone.
This very first verse is no small thing.
Verse by verse, the bible writers are still vulnerable to both ridicule and criticism.
Should even one verse fail to reconcile with the facts of science, people can insist that these writing were not divinely inspired, and that the Bible is more guessmanship or myth or merely a literary epic of a peoples whose first appearance in Western History was 3362 years ago.
But I believe a fair and tolerant review of each verse can be shown to parallel what the scientists today explain to us in regard to Cosmic Evolution.
For instance, we now know that at the moment of the Big Bang, electormagnetic radiation was of frequencies wel above the visible lightspectrum and that the Cosmos was intensely ot, so ithere actually was a pause between the Big Bang moment and the gradual appearance of light, rather confirming that same pause wherein Genese tells us that creation of visible light was a second or third step unfolding.
The Cosmic Dark Age as known to Science supports what we read in Gen 1:3-5:
Gen. 1:3 And God, (next, after the creation of the Heavens), said, Let there be light: and there was light, (which had been delayed by 400 million years after the Big Bang).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-10-2010 7:53 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by NoNukes, posted 08-24-2012 12:07 PM kofh2u has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 175 of 2073 (671311)
08-24-2012 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by saab93f
05-29-2012 3:21 AM


Im a bit torn - OTOH it would be better than the current system but then again it would be so nice if there were no religions...and thus no need to spend time in teaching and studying those. In reality it is wise to know a thing or two about every religion so that when you encounter a person you dont deliberately insult them
Edited by saab93f,
///
What's to know about religions?
Today, they are all Stoicism, a phlosophy, aren't they?
The issue in Education ought be whether the Bible says things which can be supported by the facts of science, whether there are ideas that science contradicts.
That is an analytical process one of interest to literary criticism and to our society in the West (to include the Middle East) which has been founded upon the Old Testament epic for 2000 years.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by saab93f, posted 05-29-2012 3:21 AM saab93f has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 177 of 2073 (671348)
08-24-2012 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by NoNukes
08-24-2012 12:07 PM


NoNukes:
Except that there are some things in Genesis that cannot so easily (if at all) be reconciled simply by assuming the story is mere allegory written in proper timeline order. What about day and night existing on earth before there was a Sun? How about earth existing before the sun? Or the stars being created after the earth?
///
That was true.
My post illustrtaed the night between the Big Bang and the 400 million year duration before the neutral Atom formed the Stars and visible light, sourced only from neutral atoms, flooded the darkness.
Furthermore, I do see the common sense to this idea that avoiding the discussions in a classroom is helpful when the whole adult population today is debating Genesis.
To pretend that the students are kliving a an educational vacuum seems naive.
In fact, by avoiding genesis directly ina comparison, the atheists and the bible bashers, the sexually immoral and the aggressive homosexual comunities have a field day telling the fellow students that science destroys the validity of what the bible says, rather than offering an opportunity for all to see that certain things are irrefutably and amazingly correct.
Consider Pangea:
There WAS one ocean, once, where all the waters had been collected together around Pangaea.
Gen. 1:9 And (Father Nature, the first cause), God, said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, (Panthalassa), and let (Pangea/Rodinia), the dry land appear: (composed of the Seven Large Tectonic Plates):
1. North American Plate,
2. Pacific Plate,
3. South American Plate,
4. African Plate,
5. Eurasian Plate,
6. Anartic Plate,
7. Australian Plate),...
...and it was so.
{OK - There is a trace of on-topic. - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner and related message.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by NoNukes, posted 08-24-2012 12:07 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by NoNukes, posted 08-24-2012 3:50 PM kofh2u has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 179 of 2073 (671382)
08-24-2012 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by NoNukes
08-24-2012 3:50 PM


You are not expected to "buy it," because you are against it and supplying the questions necessary for me to clarify for other readers how the exact words in each verse specifically are supported by science.
1) The Big Bang was a beginning of time and the very beginning of what has expanded into the cosmos we see today.
2) Only visible spectrums produce "the day and the night" to which the Bible refers.
3) ..."all the waters under heaven were gathere together into one place" is pretty specific.
Even if you try to get around it with the technicality of rivers and lakes, stil,l all were locked into Pangea which was surrounded by the Panthalassic Ocean.
But the first coming together of all the waters inot one place" was called Rodina, it happened on the third "day."
That would place the event exactly at the moment of the third evening of the Archean Era and the early morning of the Proterozoic Era, which compares with the similes used in Genesis:
Paleoproterozoic/plants
(Click here to link to next page in Genesis)
(Click picture to enlarge)
Divisions of the Archean Era
Gen. 1:13 And the (Neo-archean) evening (of the Archean Era) and the (Paleo-proterozoic) morning (of the Proterozoic Era) were the third "day," (time, period [general]).
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by NoNukes, posted 08-24-2012 3:50 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by NoNukes, posted 08-25-2012 8:20 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024