Students to be taught there isn't a God

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
45,692
Think you read too much slash.
I guess your knowledge on the Bible is equal to all your other knowledge. :eek:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 (New International Version)

"11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."

Gods Word (tm).

Theres more in the Bible on the penis if you want to know. Like how you cant go to Church if you lost your penis.
 
Last edited:

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
I guess your knowledge on the Bible is equal to all your other knowledge. :eek:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 (New International Version)

"11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."

Gods Word (tm).
Thanks for the insult. Since you can't argue logically you choose to insult,
how mature of you.

Again I don't see the word penis in there, and 'private parts' can imply butt,
thigh, testicles, perineum, penis or pubic region. Besides the meaning of that is evident, they're teaching morality in a way which was common among the Isrealites 3000-4000 years ago. I don't see anything perverted in that. Grow up.

Not all religious people use the Bible in it's literal sense all the time. This is accepted theology by most mainstream
Christian groups. LOL. The Bible is reinterpreted with each new generation, you can't read it the same way an uneducated, nomad Bedouin read it 4000 yrs ago. You still hung up over that.....we don't amputate peoples' arms as our justice system offers different punishments now.
 
Last edited:

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
45,692
Thanks for the insult. Since you can't argue logically you choose to insult,
how mature of you.

Again I don't see the word penis in there, and 'private parts' can imply butt,
thigh, testicles, perineum, penis or pubic region. Besides the meaning of that is evident, they're teaching morality in a way which was common among the Isrealites 3000-4000 years ago. I don't see anything perverted in that. Grow up.

Not all religious people use the Bible in it's literal sense all the time. This is accepted theology by most mainstream
Christian groups. LOL. The Bible is reinterpreted with each new generation, you can't read it the same way an uneducated, nomad Bedouin read it 4000 yrs ago. You still hung up over that.....we don't amputate peoples' arms as our justice system offers different punishments now.
Oh God... whatever Pete. It means anything you want to make it mean. Go ahead.. I am sure you can justify it in anyway you want to. Use the "translations" excuse. :rolleyes:
 

Necuno

Court Jester
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
58,567
Both what? Religion and science???
of course :D

imho:
rather remove both atheist and all related religion teachings form school and have that as a total separate; something in the lines of school of religion and philosophy - so get the kids/young adults educated rather mixed up in muddied water.
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
Oh God... whatever Pete. It means anything you want to make it mean. Go ahead.. I am sure you can justify it in anyway you want to. Use the "translations" excuse. :rolleyes:
LOL. Translations is something else. A different issue. Ie What it may have implied originally. However, the Bible is open for constant re-interpretation - it's supposed to be a Living Word of God.

This is evidently a teaching of morality. I'm sure the Israelites back in the stone ages in the desert in bad living conditions had to use harsh forms of law and punishment, the way Martial Law at times of war or States of Emergency allows soldiers to execute looters and commont thieves without due process, a trial and right to appeal.

Biblical texts are not God's direct words, but it is thought that the people who wrote it,
many hundreds of people over thousands of years, were divinely inspired.
 
Last edited:

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
of course :D

imho:
rather remove both atheist and all related religion teachings form school and have that as a total separate; something in the lines of school of religion and philosophy - so get the kids/young adults educated rather mixed up in muddied water.
I think that's what the article suggests. They may teach them that the BASIS for GOD religions use is not SCIENTIFIC. However, they're not that God does not exist. I assume they aren't that stupid. I didn't RTA though. :)
 

Necuno

Court Jester
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
58,567
I think that's what the article suggests. They may teach them that the BASIS for GOD religions use is not SCIENTIFIC. However, they're not that God does not exist. I assume they aren't that stupid. I didn't RTA though. :)
not interested in TRA-ing either. /yawn subject.
 

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
45,692
However, the Bible is open for constant re-interpretation - it's supposed to be a Living Word of God.
Torture the Bible long enough and you can get it to say anything.

This is evidently a teaching of morality. I'm sure the Israelites back in the stone ages in the desert in bad living conditions had to use harsh forms of law and punishment
Since proto-Hebrews originate from the Egyptian Haribu tribe (during the bronze age).. I dont think Israel or the Jewish religion existed in the stone age. Most of the OT is a mixture of Egyptian and Summerian laws and practices.

the way Martial Law at times of war or States of Emergency allows soldiers to execute looters and commont thieves without due process, a trial and right to appeal.
From theology to a police state in one sentence. I live Christian analogies and metaphors :D

Biblical texts are not God's direct words,
Ahmen!

but it is thought that the people who wrote it,many hundreds of people over thousands of years, were divinely inspired.
And he has written none since then? Whats the complete list of criteria to be identified as "Gods word"? How can I accept the authority on whats in the Bible?

How do you A) Identify something is divinely inspired and B) Why did God stop writing?
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
38,013
The topic title is misleading. They're not going to teach them that there 'isn't a God' but that religion is not a scientific concept. The two are vastly different. Teaching that 'God does not exist' would be teaching religion
I do not compose my own thread titles. They are as I find them on the original sites.
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
I do not compose my own thread titles. They are as I find them on the original sites.
Then the 'author' made a mistake or did it intentionally. Unless of course he has a comprehension problem.

I quote:

...which teach there is no evidence God exists.
as opposed to

...teach that God does not exist.

I'd be very interested to find scientific evidence for existence of God.
Hence, since we had none of that, this new curriculum does not teach anything new, and it definately doesn't teach that God does not exist.
It merely teaches that God is not a scientific concept, which we all KNOW.
I assume we all KNOW that.

I furthermore teach you all now: There is no scientific evidence of God's existence.
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
When last did you meet an Intelligent Designist?
You're confusing some people wanting to explain creation by a process alternative to what science shows, with proving the existence of God - scientifcally. There can also be philosophical proofs.

However, to answer, you, I don't know. Don't recall meeting one :).
 
Last edited:

grayston

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
3,733
You're confusing some people wanting to explain creation by a process alternative to what science shows, with proving the existence of God - scientifcally. There can also be philosophical proofs.

However, to answer, you, I don't know. Don't recall meeting one :).
I'm certainly not confused ... however, the fact that creationists exist in great enough numbers to be threat to scientific reasoning, means that quite a few people believe that science can prove gods.

Also, I call your bluff on the philosophical proofs story. You will not be able to show me a philosophical proof for the existence of the god mentioned in your holy book, without having to resort to your holy book for backup.

Philosophical disproofs for gods -- well, those we have in spades...
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,376
Also, I call your bluff on the philosophical proofs story. You will not be able to show me a philosophical proof for the existence of the god mentioned in your holy book, without having to resort to your holy book for backup.
You're not as well read as you think you are...

http://www.mun.ca/phil/codgito/vol3/v3doc1.html
Has no reference to the Bible.
Philosophy is a big subject my friend, don't confuse it with
theology.

Secondly, don't judge people. You know nothing about me. I'm not from your social circle.

And you are confused at least your post shows you to be so.
 
Last edited:

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
7,501
Nonsense. You're just saying anything to defend your weak argument. The principle is the same. No scientist denies something because it can't be proven, they don't advocate it either - the scientific stance is neutral. Only a theologian can deny something without scientific proof and that's what you're doing - this school isn't doing it though and the topic is incorrect because it implies something else.
However, while one might be able to say that God can't be disproven, one could disprove specific claims of phenomena that intrude on the real world. For example, one can disprove a claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.
 
Top