Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?

Gday all, Sorry, you confused two fundamentally different issues - that because we have so many copies this proves the contents true. Well, this is obviously not true - the number of copies has nothing to do with the truth of the contents. Consider -* the Iliad - over 600 manuscripts, more than the NT until after 1000AD - does this mean that the Iliad was more true than the NT until about 1000AD, but from the middle ages on, the NT became MORE TRUE than the Iliad?* the works of 10thC. Yen-Shou of Hangchow - about 400,000 copies exist, about 4000 times as many copies as NT copies at that time - does this make the work over 4000 times MORE TRUE than the NT?* the Book of Mormon - there are millions of copies of this work, many dating maybe a FEW YEARS after the original - would this make the Book of Mormon much MORE TRUE than the NT?* the Lord of the Rings - there are many millions of copies of this work, (including the original manuscript AFAIK), dating from very soon after its writing - does this makes the Lord of the Rings of vastly more true than the NT?No.
It should be obvious that the NUMBER of copies attesting to a work gives no support to the truth of the contents - yet apologists repeatedly bring this point up as if it proves something.Kap

Gday, Then why did you specifically start your comment with there being 5000 manuscripts ?If the gap between our copies and the original versions is what matters, then consider some works for which we have the original copies :What about egyptian writings in stone? We have ORIGINAL copies.
Does having the actual original carved stone copy of a story about Isis and Osiris argue for it being true?
Of course not.What about the Book of Mormon?
We have very early copies, possibly even the original manuscript.
Does that argue for the Book of Mormon being true?
Of course not.What about Scientology?
We have the original writings of L.Ron Hubbard.
We have actual video of him teachings.
We have many certain direct eye-witness accounts of him.
Does that have ANYTHING to do with it being true?
Of course not. Having early copies, even having ORIGINAL copies, (or having a large number of copies) has NOTHING to do with whether a book is true or not.Can you please explain why you think it does?
Thanks :-)KapyongEdited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

Gday, Pardon?
Micro-evolution is directly observed, every day.
Uni 101 students do micro-evolution in a petri-dish. Pardon?
Science has observed and explained evolution. Why not?
Please explain in detail. There is NO "knowing" in the process at all. There was NO knowing, there was NO design. Because evolution has nothing to do with being perfect, or reaching any goal - it's just whatever is good enough.What is YOUR explanation?
That God made it that way to cause pain deliberately?
That God bungled?
What, exactly? So, are YOU going to tell a pregnant woman that she feels pain because God's designs are incompetent ?---good luck with that one.Kap