Kneel!

[Hollie]

"They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.''

Precisely. Now read it in Hebrew. This brings the understanding that the waters rose greatly over the land, and the rain made it impossible to see high mountains or even the sky. I take it someone outside of the public school system told you the planet was covered, and no one ever discussed the Hebrew with you? Are you sure you don't want to eliminate what you were taught outside of public school?

You're identifying that waters covered the planet. How did that happen a few thousand years ago and there's no corroborating evidence?

 

[Hollie]

In context, nothing survived but Noah, his entourage and whatever and whatever animal life was on the Ark. There are posters in these threads who have provided the exact date of the flood and it was apparently only a few thousand years ago. If you disagree, how do we resolve that disagreement?

Do you care that some people only go as far as algebra in learning about math? No calculus, no physics, no trigonometry or advanced functions? I haven't a problem with people who choose to believe the entire planet was flooded and that Noah had polar bears on the ark. It merely tells me how well or how long they studied the story. Is their limited knowledge causing any more trouble than do people who stopped learning math after algebra? I can tell them what I have learned, they may have an interest, they may not. The question is whether the information should be readily available. Or, should we leave the stage only to those who believe in a planet-wide flood?

If people choose a liberal arts major, they may not need calculus or physics to work in a non-technical field.

If your studies indicate that the Bible is flawed and incorrect that is an issue to be resolved with the religious institutions.

What information do you have that is not readily available in a Sunday school setting?

Information you may have about the Biblical flood that contradicts the Bible or other details of Christian theology that you take issue with are, as noted, part of Christian theology and thus are not to be a part of the public school syllabus.

 

[Meriweather]

I'm comfortable I know the basics regarding Biblical accounts of history. I'm not comfortable with claims to supernatural events that directly conflict with everything we understand about the natural world.

The great thing about education is that we can compare and contrast what we are learning in other classes. We can consider what our ancestors perceived as supernatural against what we know of the world today. You do give students credit for making these leaps--or don't you?

 

[Meriweather]

How would an afternoon Bible class in the public schools present the notion of a global flood a few thousand years ago to those students whose morning classes were related to earth's geologic history or the Triassic, Jurassic time periods?

Asked and answered several times.

 

[Meriweather]

You're identifying that waters covered the planet.

Quite the opposite. I am identifying they did not.

 

[Meriweather]

If your studies indicate that the Bible is flawed and incorrect that is an issue to be resolved with the religious institutions.

I am saying that that there is much more to be learned about the Bible than what can be covered in a few Sunday School classes. I am betting that looking in the mirror will show you a prime example.

 

[Meriweather]

Christian theology

Christian theology is not based on Noah's Ark.

 

[MarcATL]

Bullshit

Trump did everything a president could do

 

[Hollie]

I'm comfortable I know the basics regarding Biblical accounts of history. I'm not comfortable with claims to supernatural events that directly conflict with everything we understand about the natural world.

The great thing about education is that we can compare and contrast what we are learning in other classes. We can consider what our ancestors perceived as supernatural against what we know of the world today. You do give students credit for making these leaps--or don't you?

Sure. Bible classes in public school are not allowed, though.

 

[Hollie]

Christian theology

Christian theology is not based on Noah's Ark.

Correct. But Noah's Ark in an integral part of Christian theology.

 

[Hollie]

If your studies indicate that the Bible is flawed and incorrect that is an issue to be resolved with the religious institutions.

I am saying that that there is much more to be learned about the Bible than what can be covered in a few Sunday School classes. I am betting that looking in the mirror will show you a prime example.

If you need more than a few Sunday school classes to learn about the Bible, have as many Sunday school classes as you need.

Insisting that the public schools teach the Bible is contrary to the Constitution.

 

[Hollie]

How would an afternoon Bible class in the public schools present the notion of a global flood a few thousand years ago to those students whose morning classes were related to earth's geologic history or the Triassic, Jurassic time periods?

Asked and answered several times.

The way to address teaching the physical sciences as opposed to supernaturalism in the Bible is addressed by the Constitution via the establishment clause.

 

[Mac-7]

Bullshit

Trump did everything a president could do

That guy has the manners of a ghetto bum

 

[Meriweather]

Correct. But Noah's Ark in an integral part of Christian theology.

Explain.

 

[Meriweather]

Insisting that the public schools teach the Bible is contrary to the Constitution.

It has never crossed my mind to insist. I am merely pointing out why it could be beneficial. You seem to be adamantly in favor of keeping misinformation intact.

 

[Meriweather]

The way to address teaching the physical sciences as opposed to supernaturalism in the Bible is addressed by the Constitution via the establishment clause.

I think we are through. We are going around in circles because you can't grasp the idea that the Bible can be presented without teaching--let alone establishing--any of the religions it contains. Good speaking with you again.

 

[Hollie]

Insisting that the public schools teach the Bible is contrary to the Constitution.

It has never crossed my mind to insist. I am merely pointing out why it could be beneficial. You seem to be adamantly in favor of keeping misinformation intact.

Your posts are adamant that the Bible be taught in public schools. That is not misinformation. After half-a-dozen pages, yes, my opinion is that you are insisting the Bible be taught in public schools.

 

[Hollie]

The way to address teaching the physical sciences as opposed to supernaturalism in the Bible is addressed by the Constitution via the establishment clause.

I think we are through. We are going around in circles because you can't grasp the idea that the Bible can be presented without teaching--let alone establishing--any of the religions it contains. Good speaking with you again.

That's fine. I'll offer that attempts by creationist ministries to force the Bible into public schools is expressly for the purpose of indoctrination. I

 

[Meriweather]

Your posts are adamant that the Bible be taught in public schools.

This is exactly why I am so bored. I am not adamant. I merely see something of value emerging from it. I am a great fan of knowledge. You, I see, do not care very much about it.

 

[Meriweather]

That's fine. I'll offer that attempts by creationist ministries to force the Bible into public schools is expressly for the purpose of indoctrination.

And that is news to you! Meanwhile I offer the means of thwarting them that using the very book they see as their man support. That you are against what I propose makes you their very firm ally. Personally, as you see, I stand against them.