[i]Renaming it "winter break" is a liberal way of trying too hard not to offend people who almost certainly wouldn't have been offended in the first place, and if are offended can bloody well be offended.[/i]
I'm not so sure of the 'wouldn't have been offended bit', is that not what started the thread in the first place 🙂
@Gary M, I don't think Ben was offended, I think he was a little concerned. I certainly would be if I thought that my boys were in danger of indoctrination. I'm sure he'll clarify.
To make any definite conclusion with 5% knowledge is laughable isn't it?
And yet, some people believe [i]absolutely [/i]that god did it. Laughable, did you say?
And yet, some people believe absolutely that god did it. Laughable, isn't it.
They're just as mental as the people who believe absolutely that he didn't...
Personally I have no ****ing idea, however I'm not completely happy with 'we just happened' and the laws of thermodynamics seem to imply that's not possible (however googling for rational debate on that sends you to some crazy right wing US sites) unless the universe is infinite which is a huge leap of faith of FSM levels.
A long one, but this video is a helpful reference point when trying to remember the difference between theism, agnosticism, and atheism:
This - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Concepts - really is interesting stuff. All the different flavours of Atheism in one easy article...
If I hadn't been hanging out the back of the bike sheds with all the other cool kids I might have done GCSE RE.
This is as relevant as half the posts so:
[img] 
[/img]
Merry Christmas, whatever it means to you all, & don't f*ck with the Jesus.
@Gary M, I don't think Ben was offended, I think he was a little concerned. I certainly would be if I thought that my boys were in danger of indoctrination. I'm sure he'll clarify.
Yes, I wasn't offended in the slightest. Just peeved that we might have to unbrainwash the offspring.
Edit: that's brilliant 😉
Yes, I wasn't offended in the slightest. Just peeved that we might have to unbrainwash the offspring.
That priest must have been [b]awesome[/b] if he can convert a room in a single short sermon... are you sure it wasn't Darren Brown in disguise?
Personally I have no **** idea, however I'm not completely happy with 'we just happened'
Sure. But the problem with "god did it" as an answer is that it's not actually an answer, it's just a diversion. Look.
[list]
[*]"I can't believe we 'just happened', there must be more to it than that, where did we come from?"[/*]
[*]"Well, we were created by an invisible supernatural being we like to call 'God'."[/*]
[*]"Ah, that explains it, cool. But where did this 'God' fellow come from?"[/*]
[*]"Oh, he just happened."[/*][/list]
You see? We've not actually answered the question, we've just moved the goalposts. If design is a prerequisite for intelligent life (and that's a whole other can of billy bollocks, why would any intelligent designer give us an appendix for a start?) then surely by that argument god must have been designed also. Maybe your gods have their own gods who created them? Is it turtles all the way down?
And of course, if design [i]isn't[/i] a prerequisite for intelligent the whole argument is moot anyway. If god can 'just be' then so can we.
Loving that the phrase 'let us pray' was so shocking and divisive it caused a sanctimonious email.
Also loving the cougar and his dialectical diatribes. Short story: I like going to church occassionally, dont believe in a sky fairy. Vicar (Anglo Catholic so no c of e milquetoast) once delivered a sermon where he stated that it was only his recent retirement that had triggered his movement from ear atheism to agnosticism. Summary: the people you are setting yourself against aren't who you think they are.
I'm not completely happy with 'we just happened' and the laws of thermodynamics seem to imply that's not possible
There is only misunderstanding/confusion of the laws of thermodynamics, because creationists try to represent them as open systems.
"Atheists and Christmas, only curious thing is why they call it Christmas"
Probably the same reason Christians refer to "the lords day " as Sunday even though they don't worship the God it is named for.
And yet, some people believe absolutely that god did it. Laughable, did you say?
They call it 'faith' for a reason. They call themselves believers, not knowers.
Is believing in Intelligent design a prerequisite to believing in god?
Could you not believe 'something' started the big bang, and then we are just a happy coincidence and the result of evolution/selective breeding.
There is only misunderstanding/confusion of the laws of thermodynamics, because creationists try to represent them as open systems.
What confusion? I thought the issue was we don't live in an open system unless you are happy with the concept of infinite.
Easter is already its pagan name
According to Wiki, by the time it was adopted it was simply the term for April when Easter generally falls. The actual christian festival has a direct link to the Jewish festival of Passover. The story of the resurrection takes place when Jesus is in Jerusalem to celebrate Passover. Many other countries adopt a word that derives from the Latin for Passover, such as La Pascale in French (also one of the nick names for Paris Roubaix). Whatever it is called it should fall at the same time (unless you are a member of one of the Orthodox church who have stuck with the Gregorian calendar).
Is believing in Intelligent design a prerequisite to believing in god?
I don't think so.
There's God, and there's the Bible - if you don't believe that the Bible is the literal word of God then you are free to treat it however you like - as parables, stories or scholarly writing. I think Old testament is treated this way by Jews afaik.
I thought that treating the bible as a literal truth was a fairly modern thing; the book as intended as guide to be interpreted hence "bible lessons"
Is believing in Intelligent design a prerequisite to believing in god?
I guess it depends upon how you define Intelligent Design, but it is most associated with creationists, so certainly in this country the answer would be very much no.
I know people who believe in both God and big bang theory. Since no-one knows anything about why the big bang happened and what happened before it, if such a concept even exists, then there's absolutely tons of room for God. It could've been absolutely anything, all theories are about as valid as each other in this respect.
It's also possible to beleive in God and Jesus without having to believe that the bible is a particularly accurate account of the events surrounding Jesus.
Bencooper: do you think that the nativity play was part of the formal curriculum (as that term is properly understood by educators)?
It was held in normal school hours, as were the dress rehearsals etc, so I'm going to go with yes - though I don't know what definition educators would use.
OP. I think you acted accordingly. I don't think the school should be booking David Icke for Crassmass talks after a school play, we need more people to speak up, we already have loads and loads of sheep who accept the staus quo just 'because'.
Christmas is very clearly for Christians. Don't choke while stuffing your greedy chops in the name of Cheesarse.
which bit of "we just happened" offends which law of thermodynamics?
What confusion? I thought the issue was we don't live in an open system unless you are happy with the concept of infinite.
The law of thermodynamics doesn't explain everything it just explains what happens in a closed system, that is what it is, there is no extrapolation into everything, into life the universe or any other bullshit.
and maybe it's wrong, I don't care if it is, that's science and we keep advancing and keep correcting, and keep understanding that we need to learn more. But it is the best explanation we have and the thirst to learn more is the bedrock of real knowledge.
Christmas is very clearly for Christians
It very clearly isn't! A couple of weeks of excess, bingeing and extravagance is pretty much the exact opposite of what Jesus would want, I reckon!
It's a story, just like lots of other stories only it's also been heavily commercialised, you can't expect to enjoy Christmas without being 'educated' into the Nativity thing.
I don't know who I find most irritating Theists or Atheists, they're both unable to prove their point and howl fowl at each other.
Just go along with it, live and let live, for the moment you live in a Christian country that used to believe in all this, we all went through it, didn't stop us applying logic in later life and questioning the whole bollox of it all.
Hey if the next lot get control you'll be fasting, your mrs will be covered up and all manner of sharianess applied, won't you be moaning at that? No, probably not, they'd stone you.
If we have to have a religion taught to kids, then perhaps the turn the other cheek mob is the lessor of two evils.
My kids attend a CofE school. Eldest was 5 when he twigged that the Bible may not be true.
Hey if the next lot get control you'll be fasting, your mrs will be covered up and all manner of sharianess applied, won't you be moaning at that?
House! What do I win?
It very clearly isn't! A couple of weeks of excess, bingeing and extravagance is pretty much the exact opposite of what Jesus would want, I reckon!
Christmas is for christians like BNP rallies are for BNP supporters (not for people who just fancy a stroll/ enjoy the electric atmosphere 😯 )
Throw the shackles off friend, try starting by celebrating your secular christmas on the 26th or even the 29th if you're brave enough.. maybe change the name too; something like [b]'The Molgrips family Journey of life end of year reflection and celebration extravaganza event'[/b] and accept the new world with open arms.
You never know it might be fun and unique and represent you and yours a little better while also pulling away from Crassmas nonsense.
House! What do I win?.
their only brain cell?
"Just go along with it, live and let live, for the moment you live in a Christian country"
Apart from the fact it no longer is a Christian country how do you suppose it ever got to be a Christian Country?
Eldest was 5 when he twigged that the Bible may not be true
As is the case for many children. See the work of James Fowler and Scott Peck for stages of faith development.
That said, I'm sure you sought to expand his definition of 'true' by explaining various epistemological categories, and how empirical truth represents just one form.
I know people who believe in both God and big bang theory. Since no-one knows anything about why the big bang happened and what happened before it, if such a concept even exists, then there's absolutely tons of room for God. It could've been absolutely anything, all theories are about as valid as each other in this respect.
The great atheist/agnostic biologist [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould ]Stephen Jay Gould[/url] would agree with you whole-heartedly.
He, like many men of science, understood that faith and science were not two competing categories of thought.
^^ what I am forever saying. The 2 are not incompatible.
they really are separate
Faith is a a belief in a think known but not proven and science is the exact opposite as it seeks to remove the infinite error that faith can cause. I dont see how they could be more opposite tbh
Furthermore in each "universe" we have in one we have an all powerful deity that made everything and can controls all in the other we dont its just random shit,laws and time.
Only one of these accounts can be true.
"If you absolutely forced me to bet on the existence of a conventional anthropomorphic deity, of course I'd bet no. But, basically, Huxley was right when he said that agnosticism is the only honorable position because we really cannot know. And that's right. I'd be real surprised if there turned out to be a conventional God.
From your own link he really did not think or believe as you claim and neither do many men* [ sic] of science
I have known one devout evolutionary biologist but they were largely incoherent when they tried to reconcile these two beliefs. It really is one or the other though some agnostics and religious science types claim they can somehow co exist.
Christians have been trying to get in our midwinter festival for centuries, the sweet baby jeesus story is harmless enough, if the kids treat it like the gruffalo or aliens love underpants and other classics.
There's not really any need for a vicar to show up and start preaching tho, so it's fair enough to send an email. Unless they have appropriate clerics turn up for every religious festival, eid, diwali , hanuka etc in which case it's probably a really good school that will help toward creating an integrated and egalitarian society for all, rather than isolationism and ignorance.
try starting by celebrating your secular christmas on the 26th or even the 29th if you're brave enough
How do you know I don't? 🙂
Since I celebrate by eating lots, not working and generally indulging and having a good time, it lasts well over a week and starts on the 23rd. I may start calling it Saturnalia. Or maybe Bacchanalia.. 😉
but they were largely incoherent when they tried to reconcile these two beliefs
Incoherent to you, maybe 😉 but you aren't the one who has to understand it.
We have a celebration in the middle of winter because it's cold, dark, and generally shitty. We need to eat, drink, dance, and sing to stop ourselves from committing suicide while we're waiting for spring. Christians decided to confiscate the winter celebrations and turn it into a celebration of the birth of Christ.
Now that I've got a son I feel like I'm walking a tightrope. On the one hand I don't want any religious hocus pocus put in his head. When he asks me what happens when he dies I'm going to tell him he's dead and that's it (I may play around with the wording a bit). I don't want him being indoctrinated into the far easier to accept idea that we never really die.
On the other hand I don't want him to be the weird kid who has to go to a special room when the other kids are rehearsing because his parents don't want him involved in harmless religious activities.
So, I bite the bullet and just let him get on with it. But if some god botherer then got up and started throwing the fact that he'd gotten all the kids to dance to his tune in my face I would be very pissed off. So I'd say an email was the very least they could expect.
Only one of these accounts can be true.
As you know from past discussions on this question, I really can't agree with you.
I have used this analogy before, but we don't read the great poets and say, because their language is something other than empirically-verifiable, that what they said was not true. 'True' and 'false' do not come into it.
In some ways, I would argue that religion is like poetry. And as you will see in that video I posted a few posts back (on this thread), it is entirely possible to be both atheistic and agnostic, just as it is possible to be theistic and agnostic.
The categories we end up arguing on here so often oversimplify these and many other categories.
The only thing I think that should offend any of us is hatred and extremism in all areas of human activity, as opposed to some minister who talked about the Christian basis of Christmas at, well, Christmas.
Unless they have appropriate clerics turn up for every religious festival, eid, diwali , hanuka etc in which case it's probably a really good school that will help toward creating an integrated and egalitarian society for all, rather than isolationism and ignorance.
Fair enough. Or no clerics at all, as per Canada.
Anyway, science isn't necessarily all about "proof". It's about hypotheses and weight of evidence in favour or against.
Educated guesses then?
Like a religion but with an external faith system rather than an internal one?