By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - On the origin of education: Evolution in British schools

Kasz216 on 30 July 2009
ManusJustus said:
Kasz216 said:

The word Firmament means to spread out. 

Your probably one of those people that think people expected Christopher Columbus was going to fall off the "ends of the earth".

No, the educated in the Middle Ages knew that the world was round.  The only people in opposition to the idea was some in the Church and the general population.  Also, the word firmament doesnt mean 'to spread out' in many cases of the Bible since it is an actual place where God puts stars, the sun, the moon, and uses to seperate sea water from the fresh water in the sky.

I'd probably ignore the Bible verses too if it made my argument look bad.

Yes.  It was an actual place... that god spread out and put the stars.  Something that was stretched.  That has nothing to do with being flat.

There is no actual ignoring it so much as you being completly dense about something because you want to be.

Continue to strawman.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 30 July 2009
The_vagabond7 said:
In my opinion, I feel conflicted on biblical literalism. On one hand, it's obviously absurd and loony to take the bible as the unadulterated literal account of history of the world. There was not a flood 4000 years ago that left seven people and a small group of animals to create every civilization, culture, language, and biological diversity that we have today. You'd have to be incredibly ignorant of so many fields of study to believe that. And while it's grossly ignorant and absurd, at least it's relatively consistent intellectually within it's own bizarre world. It is an unflinching world view.

On the other hand, I think biblical allegory is really an intellectually dishonest position. Because it essentially is just a constant state of cutting up the bible into that which is socially and scientifically acceptable for modern times. It has nothing to do with what the bible says, it only has to do with what you can make the bible say. What liberal Christians believe now is nothing like what Christians believed a hundred years ago, or two hundred years ago, or further back. And is influenced almost entirely by the moral and scientific zeitgeist of the day. It is the act of making the bible into a hand puppet.

But on the other hand, while taking a non-literalist position I think is intellectually dishonest, it is greatly preferable morally and socially. Because it's the ones that take it literally that kill abortion doctors, think homosexuals are abominations and atheists are all immoral murderers, and want to dissect our education system and take out all of the stuff they feel contradicts their world view. It's the ones that believe it's not to be taken so literally that you can go have a beer with, and they just want to be a good person.

Personally, for me at least, beer wins out of intellectual honesty, so I'd much rather hope that American christians move towards a more liberal view of the bible than the revert to believing what they believe hell or high water. Who wants a beer? I want a beer.

Biblical literalism has never actually been believed though.  So how could it be intellectually dishonest?

If so that would make every work that's an allegory intellectually dishonest.

I mean is the girl who cried wolf intellectually dishonest?



The_vagabond7 on 30 July 2009

Biblical literalism has never been believed? Am I missing something? Ok, present time aside, do you actually think the ancient Israelites didn't believe in the flood or Adam and eve? Jesus referenced the flood as if was a historical event. Jesus family tree leads back to Adam. Do you really think that the state run church that was burning people that didn't agree the earth was flat had the presence of mind to say "Well adam and eve weren't really people, obviously civilization didn't spring from one couple" when even a disturbing number of modern people can't even figure that out?

Obviously while the bible was being written and since it's been "completed" so to speak, people have taken the bible literally, so maybe I'm missing something when you say "Biblical literalism has never actually been believed". Maybe you care to elaborate kasz, because I'm not following.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Kasz216 on 30 July 2009
The_vagabond7 said:
Biblical literalism has never been believed? Am I missing something? Ok, present time aside, do you actually think the ancient Israelites didn't believe in the flood or Adam and eve? Jesus referenced the flood as if was a historical event. Jesus family tree leads back to Adam. Do you really think that the state run church that was burning people that didn't agree the earth was flat had the presence of mind to say "Well adam and eve weren't really people, obviously civilization didn't spring from one couple" when even a disturbing number of modern people can't even figure that out?

Obviously while the bible was being written and since it's been "completed" so to speak, people have taken the bible literally, so maybe I'm missing something when you say "Biblical literalism has never actually been believed". Maybe you care to elaborate kasz, because I'm not following.

The church didn't burn people for beliveing the earth was flat... that's a myth actually.

What churches back then had a problem with was people claiming that people who lived in the other continents had a different origin then those who lived here... and that ocean travel to another land across that vast ocean was impossible and therefore the other lands were unpopulated.



The_vagabond7 on 30 July 2009
Kasz216 said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Biblical literalism has never been believed? Am I missing something? Ok, present time aside, do you actually think the ancient Israelites didn't believe in the flood or Adam and eve? Jesus referenced the flood as if was a historical event. Jesus family tree leads back to Adam. Do you really think that the state run church that was burning people that didn't agree the earth was flat had the presence of mind to say "Well adam and eve weren't really people, obviously civilization didn't spring from one couple" when even a disturbing number of modern people can't even figure that out?

Obviously while the bible was being written and since it's been "completed" so to speak, people have taken the bible literally, so maybe I'm missing something when you say "Biblical literalism has never actually been believed". Maybe you care to elaborate kasz, because I'm not following.

The church didn't burn people for beliveing the earth was flat... that's a myth actually.

What churches back then had a problem with was people claiming that people who lived in the other continents had a different origin then those who lived here... and that ocean travel to another land across that vast ocean was impossible and therefore the other lands were unpopulated.

Ok, I got carried away and gave to a bit of hyperbole. I do know that the middle ages flat earth thing came largely from a bizarre romantic notion of the dark ages from more recent centuries. But your response doesn't actually answer anything I was pointing out.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 30 July 2009
The_vagabond7 said:
Kasz216 said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Biblical literalism has never been believed? Am I missing something? Ok, present time aside, do you actually think the ancient Israelites didn't believe in the flood or Adam and eve? Jesus referenced the flood as if was a historical event. Jesus family tree leads back to Adam. Do you really think that the state run church that was burning people that didn't agree the earth was flat had the presence of mind to say "Well adam and eve weren't really people, obviously civilization didn't spring from one couple" when even a disturbing number of modern people can't even figure that out?

Obviously while the bible was being written and since it's been "completed" so to speak, people have taken the bible literally, so maybe I'm missing something when you say "Biblical literalism has never actually been believed". Maybe you care to elaborate kasz, because I'm not following.

The church didn't burn people for beliveing the earth was flat... that's a myth actually.

What churches back then had a problem with was people claiming that people who lived in the other continents had a different origin then those who lived here... and that ocean travel to another land across that vast ocean was impossible and therefore the other lands were unpopulated.

Ok, I got carried away and gave to a bit of hyperbole. I do know that the middle ages flat earth thing came largely from a bizarre romantic notion of the dark ages from more recent centuries. But your response doesn't actually answer anything I was pointing out.

I don't believe the leaders of the religion ever took the bible literal no.  Did some people here or there?  Sure.  

Priests today who don't take the bible literally speak of the bible as literal.  That's just how people talked

Afterall early christian tradition has dozens of conflicting scriptures that were all talked as fact.

Remember up until Martin Luther... interpretation of the bible was seen as something only a priest could be done.

If the bible were literal what interpretation would be needed?



RockSmith372 on 30 July 2009

Ya i think that evolution is too big of a subject not to be taught earlier. I think they should teach the subject as a chapter in science class every year and add alittle more information everytime.



ManusJustus on 30 July 2009
Kasz216 said:
ManusJustus said:
Kasz216 said:

The word Firmament means to spread out. 

Your probably one of those people that think people expected Christopher Columbus was going to fall off the "ends of the earth".

No, the educated in the Middle Ages knew that the world was round.  The only people in opposition to the idea was some in the Church and the general population.  Also, the word firmament doesnt mean 'to spread out' in many cases of the Bible since it is an actual place where God puts stars, the sun, the moon, and uses to seperate sea water from the fresh water in the sky.

I'd probably ignore the Bible verses too if it made my argument look bad.

Yes.  It was an actual place... that god spread out and put the stars.  Something that was stretched.  That has nothing to do with being flat.

There is no actual ignoring it so much as you being completly dense about something because you want to be.

Continue to strawman.

I mentioned the firmament to show how wrong the Bible was.  Surely God doesnt think that people will be forced to live in caves to escape stars that are falling to Earth, or that God uses the firmament to seperate the waters (which the Hebrews directly borrowed from Babylonian mythology, namely the Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh).

Hopefully God, or any of his followers, are not dense enough to believe that.



Final-Fan on 30 July 2009
Kasz216 said:
Remember up until Martin Luther... interpretation of the bible was seen as something only a priest could be done.

If the bible were literal what interpretation would be needed?

If the law is literal, why do we need judges and lawyers to interpret it? 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Kasz216 on 31 July 2009
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Remember up until Martin Luther... interpretation of the bible was seen as something only a priest could be done.

If the bible were literal what interpretation would be needed?

If the law is literal, why do we need judges and lawyers to interpret it? 

We don't.  Nothing except for the really complicated property laws and tax laws that nobody can understand because there is more for one person to read then anyone could go over due to government bueracracy.

Judges and Laywers for criminal trials aren't there to interpret laws... but to figure out if people did what they said they did.  Except for the supreme court.  Which is really needed for appeals but they do get into a lot of areas they shouldn't need to.