The Religion of Just Happened

[The Barbarian]

I used to review textbooks in biology.   Never saw it once.   Name me a biology textbook that teaches atheistic anything.

I'll make a point of nailing the publisher and getting that out to as many universities as I can.   What do you have?

On 8/18/2020 at 12:30 PM, David1701 said:

I don't have them any more.  In any case, they would all be very outdated by now, since I went to university in 1982.

No one else can show me an example, either.  Given the number of biology books I've reviewed, I'm pretty sure why.   And I went to university almost 20 years before you did.

 

[David1701]

12 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

That's not atheism.  That's not even agnosticism.    Public schools are prohibited by our religious freedoms in the First Amendment, from advocating religion or denying religion.  So they just don't bring it up.   Fortunately, science works the same way if you believe in God or if you don't.   Just like plumbing.    I would assume that Britain observes religious freedom as well, and thereby doesn't teach religion or atheism.

 Failing to teach your religion, is not the same thing as teaching atheism.

 

When I was at school, we had a morning assembly (a couple of hymns and a prayer) before classes.  We also had R.E. (religious education), which was Christian, once a week.  Nowadays, R.E. includes various false religions (but taught neutrally, not as being false), as well as Christianity.

Biology was taught atheistically (abiogenesis, no created kinds, etc.).

Operational science works the same way; but origins science does not, because it's based on interpretations that rely upon beliefs.

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

When I was at school, we had a morning assembly (a couple of hymns and a prayer) before classes.  We also had R.E. (religious education), which was Christian, once a week.  Nowadays, R.E. includes various false religions (but taught neutrally, not as being false), as well as Christianity.

In a public school, religion shouldn't be taught at all.   If you teach comparative religion in philosophy classes, that's a different thing.   The key is not to advocate or to deny any religion at all.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

Biology was taught atheistically (abiogenesis, no created kinds, etc.).

That's not atheistic.   Science takes no position on anything supernatural, because it can't.   It neither denies nor supports religion.   

You might as well talk about atheistic plumbing.   

 

[David1701]

21 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

In a public school, religion shouldn't be taught at all.   If you teach comparative religion in philosophy classes, that's a different thing.   The key is not to advocate or to deny any religion at all.

 

Are you an atheist, because you certainly sound like one?

The primary function of teaching, should be to teach the children about God, his ways and his creation.  Every subject (whether maths, English, geography, etc.), should be taught with the Lord and his word in mind.

If you do not advocate Christianity, in school teaching, then you are against it.  There is no middle ground.  You are either for Jesus or you are against him, there is no neutrality.

Quote

That's not atheistic.   Science takes no position on anything supernatural, because it can't.   It neither denies nor supports religion.

That is atheistic materialism, straight out the handbook of people like Richard Dawkins.

Many of the founders of most branches of science, started with the desire to find out how God's creation works; in fact, every scientific discipline relies on the fact that the universe is orderly - something to be expected, if there is a God; but not otherwise.

Quote

You might as well talk about atheistic plumbing.

Don't be ridiculous.  Plumbing is purely practical and does not start with any philosophical basis.

[The Barbarian]

In a public school, religion shouldn't be taught at all.   If you teach comparative religion in philosophy classes, that's a different thing.   The key is not to advocate or to deny any religion at all.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

Are you an atheist, because you certainly sound like one?

Are you an atheist?   Because you seem to know very little about Christians and what we believe.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

The primary function of teaching, should be to teach the children about God, his ways and his creation. 

That is the function of parents and church.   It is not something the government should be meddling into.   It's not just the law; it's what God wants.   God neither wants nor needs a government hand-out.    Jesus  told us to give God what is God's and give Caesar what is Caesar's.   You are either for Jesus or you are against him, there is no neutrality.

Science takes no position on anything supernatural, because it can't.   It neither denies nor supports religion.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

That is atheistic materialism, straight out the handbook of people like Richard Dawkins.

No, that is orthodox Christian belief.   God is not about science and science is not about God.   Science is merely a method for understanding the physical universe. Nothing more than that.  Too weak a method to consider God.  

Science can't talk about God.   But scientists can.   If this puzzles you, you should learn more about Christianity and what we believe as Christians.

You might as well talk about atheistic plumbing.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

 Plumbing is purely practical and does not start with any philosophical basis.

Yes, like science.   This is why people of all religious beliefs and even those with none at all, can do science.   Just as you can have Jewish, Christian, Muslim and atheistic plumbers.

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by The Barbarian

[Omegaman 3.0]

9 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

That is the function of parents and church.   It is not something the government should be meddling into.   It's not just the law; it's what God wants.   God neither wants nor needs a government hand-out.    Jesus  told us to give God what is God's and give Caesar what is Caesar's.   You are either for Jesus or you are against him, there is no neutrality.

Science takes no position on anything supernatural, because it can't.   It neither denies nor supports religion.

Some interesting thoughts there.

I agree, it is the function of parents and the church. The church is every true follower of Christ, not buildings, congregations, denominations, etc.

I am not sure that is it not something that government should not meddle in, but person's religion should not be dictated by any human institution, that is between a person and the creator. It's not just the law? Are you sure it is even the law?

I live in the U.S., and the highest law of our land, is meant to secure the free exercise of religion, so yes, in that legal sense, the government should not meddle, in fact, it specifically states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof 

so, taking that at it's word, then congress that not make a law that says:

"you have to believe this"

nor can it make a law that says:

"you cannot teach the Bible" nor "you cannot pray here" or even "you cannot say people of X religion or no religion, are going to Hell"

In other words, religion is none of congress' business, one way or the other, and congress is our legislative (law making) branch!

Further is states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Since we have just seen that congress has no authority to legislate about religion, and that such authority is left to the states and the people, we know that only local laws do have such authority. If the state of Maryland, for example, decides it wants to have Roman Catholicism as it's official state religion, it may do so! Guess what, it was called Maryland, for a reason!

Also, in the early days of the U.S. several states required confession of certain religious convictions if one was to hold public office. I am not saying that I think that is a good model, but I am saying that is the proper exercise of the law of the land.

As John Adams put it:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." 

Also real science is about knowledge, and knowledge is not limited to the natural realm. What we often call science, we have restricted to areas that we can investigate and test with our 'scientific' method. That itself, is an interesting investigation. Scientific method has evolved over many centuries, going back at least as far as Aristotle. Even Christians (Like Newton) have contributed to is, and improved it, and I think it has continued to be improved, and has proven to be useful.

However, it is really a philosophical tool, man made, and I doubt that you could really prove the validity of the scientific method, using the scientific method. Certainly science, as we have come to know it, is not all about knowledge, it has become about limiting knowledge to things like mass, energy, space and time. All of those fall under the category of what I (and others) call the creatiopn, and it is at least aware, that it cannot address the metaphysical, as you have pointed out. Perhaps, the physical is not all there is, nor even what is most important.

[David1701]

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

In a public school, religion shouldn't be taught at all.   If you teach comparative religion in philosophy classes, that's a different thing.   The key is not to advocate or to deny any religion at all.

Are you an atheist?   Because you seem to know very little about Christians and what we believe.

That is the function of parents and church.   It is not something the government should be meddling into.   It's not just the law; it's what God wants.   God neither wants nor needs a government hand-out.    Jesus  told us to give God what is God's and give Caesar what is Caesar's.   You are either for Jesus or you are against him, there is no neutrality.

Science takes no position on anything supernatural, because it can't.   It neither denies nor supports religion.

No, that is orthodox Christian belief.   God is not about science and science is not about God.   Science is merely a method for understanding the physical universe. Nothing more than that.  Too weak a method to consider God.  

Science can't talk about God.   But scientists can.   If this puzzles you, you should learn more about Christianity and what we believe as Christians.

You might as well talk about atheistic plumbing.

Yes, like science.   This is why people of all religious beliefs and even those with none at all, can do science.   Just as you can have Jewish, Christian, Muslim and atheistic plumbers.

 

Schools were started by churches and taught them the Bible, as well as languages, maths, etc.; so, before you go spouting ignorantly and arrogantly, you should learn your facts.

You do not come across as a Christian, because you want to evict Christ from the schools and teach them evolution instead, which is based on atheistic materialism.

Of course "science" can take a position on supernatural things.  It is only atheistic scientists who want to exclude God from science, as some have stated.

I'll pray for you; but, from now on, unless I see a sign of repentance, I will be treating you as an unbeliever, since there is no evidence of good fruit, faith or even humility, in your posts.

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

Schools were started by churches and taught them the Bible, as well as languages, maths, etc.; so, before you go spouting ignorantly and arrogantly, you should learn your facts.

Actually, public schools were started very early in our nation.  The Northwest Ordinance set aside one section of every  township for public schools.   Before you go spouting ignorantly and arrogantly, you should learn your history.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

You do not come across as a Christian, because you want to evict Christ from the schools

I'll give you the benefit of a doubt and accept your claim to be one of us; few of us live up to it all the time.  It's probably not a smart idea to question people's faith here.   I won't report you, but some people might.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

because you want to evict Christ from the schools

You really missed on that one.   My daughter was an officer in the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.  She prayed with her friends before school at the flagpole, and during FCA meetings in school.   You see, it's perfectly legal for students to do that, as long as the school doesn't prescribe it.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

and teach them evolution instead, which is based on atheistic materialism.

You missed on that one, too.  Even Darwin just assumed that God created the first living things. 

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.

Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1872

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

Of course "science" can take a position on supernatural things.

Nope.   It can only comment on the natural universe.   The methodology of science limits it to the natural.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

It is only atheistic scientists who want to exclude God from science, as some have stated.

No,that's wrong,too.    Science just has no way to consider the supernatural.   Fortunately, scientists do.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

I'll pray for you

Well, thank you.  I can always use prayers.   I'll pray for you, too.

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

but, from now on, unless I see a sign of repentance, I will be treating you as an unbeliever

When you try to push people away from God, you only succeed in distancing yourself from God.   It's a very unwise idea.  Please do some prayerful meditation on that before you distance yourself from Him.

Often, humility is a difficult thing.    But it can, in the long run,save your soul.

 

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

Oliver Cromwell

As I said, give it some prayerful thought before you do this to yourself.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

13 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Some interesting thoughts there.

I agree, it is the function of parents and the church. The church is every true follower of Christ, not buildings, congregations, denominations, etc.

I am not sure that is it not something that government should not meddle in, but person's religion should not be dictated by any human institution, that is between a person and the creator. It's not just the law? Are you sure it is even the law?

Jesus says that we should separate what is due to Caesar and what is due to God.  I believe Him.   And yes, it's the law in America.   The first amendment prohibits the government from supporting religion and prohibits it from restricting religion.   It must remain neutral.   Benign neglect.

13 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Further is states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Amendment XIV assures that states cannot violate the protections of the First Amendment.   So, since that was ratified, states can't impose religion in public schools,either.

13 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Also real science is about knowledge, and knowledge is not limited to the natural realm.

Actually, science is about the natural.   And it's limited to that.   There are other ways of knowing about the supernatural, but science can't do it.

13 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Scientific method has evolved over many centuries, going back at least as far as Aristotle.

Aristotle wasn't very good at it.   He was eclipsed by Democritus of Abdera, who actually first used what we now call the scientific method.    It was refined and codified by Islamic scientists in the Middle Ages, and brought to Europe by Francis Bacon.   That set off an explosion of scientific investigation that continues to this day.

But it's only applicable to the physical universe.   For anything beyond that, you must go a different way.   Fortunately, there is a different way.

 

 

 

[Omegaman 3.0]

14 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Amendment XIV assures that states cannot violate the protections of the First Amendment.   So, since that was ratified, states can't impose religion in public schools,either.

I thought the 14th Amendment extended rights to former slaves, and I wrong? I am not sure how that applies here, I certainly am not aware of an amendment that undoes the 1st Amendment, and I would be surprised to find out that I never heard of it. If there is such a thing , then that would mean that congress has a right to make a law requiring Islam (for example) to be taught  in schools, and for that matter, imposed upon the will of the people, so I do not see how it would make your case. I suspect also, that you would oppose that idea anyway. Either congress has the right to impose and restrict relgious expression, or it does not, which is it?  I am not sure what you are talking about, perhaps you could clarify, and even a quote would be nice!

You also said:

Quote

Actually, science is about the natural.   And it's limited to that.   There are other ways of knowing about the supernatural, but science can't do it.

I guess in a world where you get to make op or restrict definitions for your own purposes, that might be true. However, last time I checked, I do not live in that world. In my World, there is a dictionary, and it says:

Definition of science

1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding

2a: a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study, the science of theology

b: something (such as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge have it down to a science

3a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method

b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE

4: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws cooking is both a science and an art

So my friend Websters disagrees with your notion, and last I knew, natural scientists do not own the copyright to the word "science". Webster says that even theology is a science, as I said, science is about knowledge, not limited to what some people restrict it to.

Further you commented:

Quote

Jesus says that we should separate what is due to Caesar and what is due to God.  I believe Him. 

I believe Him also. He maintained that the scriptures cannot be broken. The scriptures say that God own's it all! So I render everything to God, as it is all, already His. As a Christian though, I also know that He puts governments into power, and that we are to pay taxes, so there is your "render unto Caesar" application. I do hold that children are the responsibility of parents, not the government. That is why my five kids were all home-schooled, largely because I was concerned that they would be indoctrinated with unbalanced ideas about the natural world as I was in school, and would get some of their notions about what is unacceptable behavior and ideology, from liberal teachers and their student peers, and I wanted to spare them from that abuse. It all worked out fine, by the way.