The latest edition of the nutter paper has turned up.

One of the most intelligent people I ever knew – a genuine polymath whose idea of fun was “for absolutely no reason other than I’m at a loose end this weekend, I think I’ll go and learn Russian” – was a practising Christian. I asked him how he rationalised that and he told me he put it in a box marked “Other.” Like, over here is physics and over there is something else.

I have an aunt is who is both a young earth creationist and a head of science at a (well regarded) school

Where, in the United States?

No UK state school would allow a science teacher to teach creationism. I doubt that an independent school would be allowed to. Certainly not as a science.

The Catholic church’s position on Genesis is that it is a “fable”, it can be taught only to convey a message, to tell a story to provide a lesson or morality.

No UK state school would allow a science teacher to teach creationism

Wasn’t there a bit of a To Do when it was discovered that some Academies ( I want to say in the North East, but I could be wrong) were teaching it? This would ‘ve been early noughties though I think.

No UK state school would allow a science teacher to teach creationism.

The poster you’re replying to didn’t say they were teaching it.

No they didn’t. I assumed that they were as it made it more relevant to what was being discussed.

Edit: It would also mean that the head of science in a well regarded school was teaching stuff which she didn’t believe.

Not exactly a solid foundation for a well regarded school.

Our assumptions differ, then.

Does it matter? Science doesn’t require belief, the facts don’t change based on the opinions of the teacher. (Of course, if they’re teaching Creationism in a Science class then that’s problematic, but that’s a scenario of your own assumption.)

Arguably the same could be true of an RE teacher if the lessons are “Christians believe X whereas Muslims believe Y,” the teacher potentially believing that it’s all nonsense is neither here nor there.

Schools have curriculums that they had to follow, last I knew.

Arguably the same could be true of an RE teacher if the lessons are “Christians believe X whereas Muslims believe Y,” the teacher potentially believing that it’s all nonsense is neither here nor there.

We had a mix of very good / interesting and truly shite RE teachers.
The very good ones taught about the different religions, histories, beliefs etc while the very bad ones put on a lot of videos. One we watched over the course of about 4 lessons was a 2hr “documentary” about Nostradamus from the point of view of proving he was a genius, could tell the future, how many of his predictions had come true and so on.

We had a Jehovah’s Witness girl in our class who was excused RE lessons, the school assembly (which was a predominantly Christian affair with a hymn and sometimes a short parable from the school chaplain) and she also refused to attend any biology classes about evolution or sex education.

Schools have curriculums that they had to follow, last I knew.

You are somewhat out of date if you mean the national curriculum.
Academies dont have to so thats an ever increasing number of kids.

The poster you’re replying to didn’t say they were teaching it.

Correct. They didn’t mix their personal beliefs with the day job.

I asked him how he rationalised that and he told me he put it in a box marked “Other.” Like, over here is physics and over there is something else.

Yes, my aunt said something similar, science says world old, and that number goes in the science box. (her interpretation of) Bible says world young, that number goes in the faith box. She believed the numbers in the faith box, but taught the numbers in the science box. Seemed bonkers to me. Lots of things that woman, but not a fool. Like i said, people are weird!

You are somewhat out of date if you mean the national curriculum.

Right. Dunno, I left high school in the late 80s, I believed that what they’re expected to teach was mandated.

We had a Jehovah’s Witness girl in our class who was excused RE lessons, the school assembly (which was a predominantly Christian affair with a hymn and sometimes a short parable from the school chaplain) and she also refused to attend any biology classes about evolution or sex education.

Different times. I’d have loved to have been able to skip RE and assembly being a devout atheist.

Religious privilege gets right on my nipples. RE is – well, should be – religious EDUCATION not doctrine. Whatever your beliefs (or whatever beliefs you’ve been told to believe by your family) there shouldn’t be a harm in learning what other people think. I learned about WWII at school, it didn’t make me a Nazi. Teachings of faith belong in a church / mosque / synagogue etc.

Seemed bonkers to me.

What I find strange is that a school where the head of the science department taught subjects which she didn’t personally believe we’re factually true was “well regarded”.

So when her pupils asked her questions she basically (in her opinion) lied to them?

I am struggling to believe that she was a particularly good teacher although I don’t doubt that she got away with it.

And what a poor commitment to her religious beliefs – to deny on a daily basis that she has them.

people are weird!

Well yes, some certainly are!

So when her pupils asked her questions she basically (in her opinion) lied to them? … And what a poor commitment to her religious beliefs – to deny on a daily basis that she has them.

We could go back to what was said about similar people – scientists with faith – they might have two compartments within their mind; one for ideas about faith, another for ideas about science… We’re bigger than our ideas about the world <more than just the sum of our parts>. Both concerned with what we don’t know. One thing I do know, we don’t know anything about this person so seems rather futile and argumentative to assume anything about them whatsoever.

Different times. I’d have loved to have been able to skip RE and assembly being a devout atheist.

I was at secondary school early 90’s. Also an atheist, but did RE GCSE because the alternative was geography and I hated that.

RE GCSE was great. It was structured around different topics and how a selection of different religions respond to that topic. We’d also pick out bits of the various texts and see how that related to modern life.

It wasn’t in any way teaching us that this is the Bible and this is fact.

If anything, it reinforced my atheism tbh.

Gone a bit off topic, what’s on the front page of the “The Light!?” 😉

I never said everything about religion has to be 100% provable science… simply that just because someone believes in a “supernatural super-being” doesn’t mean they ignore modern science, and that they can be compatible.

(Note I am never very good at arguing any point and getting my meaning across, this doesn’t necessarily mean the point is not valid and that someone else wouldn’t do a better job! In short: don’t jump to conclusions about a massive complicated subject about which you may have very little actual understanding.)

You don’t need to argue it well… my real point is there is little or no difference between believing in something with no proof that is simply a product of your upbringing and most conspiracy theories. The existence or not of supernatural beings is slightly separate in it’s proving the non existence.

Cougar

Who made god?

It’s a valid question though, isn’t it? If “god” is the answer to “where did stuff come from?” then all we’ve done is displaced the problem elsewhere. The universe cannot possibly be “eternal and infinite” therefore in order to explain it there must be a god who totally can be.

To put that simply if an alien race created our universe from some other dimension is that gods or their elected leader or whomever a God? What would be the difference? It doesn’t solve infinite regression

Proving the non existence of something mythical is not possible but the other examples are where something can be proven not to be true such as transubstantiation where bread and wine is LITERALLY transformed into flesh and blood.

My FiL is a religious Jew and a professor of physics who also manages computer science & security at his country’s equivalent of CERN… intelligence has nothing to do with it, it’s not only stupid people like me who believe in fairies

Let’s take a step back… so ‘aliens taught how to build the pyramids’ .. (popular conspiracy)
What is the “nature” of god for you’re FiL?? Is it a supreme being who created the universe and to whom we therefore owe some respect and tradition or does he really believe Moses lived to 400 and the walls of Jericho literally fell with a trumpet and carrying a box round them? etc.

Ernielynch

I’m trying to be polite too but you frankly don’t understand Catholic teaching. Of course the Pope believes in transubstantiation, it is absolutely central to Catholic teaching.

The previous Pope allowed gluten free host and so far as I know that hasn’t been overturned.
Either it’s hypocrisy OR transubstantiation is not literal to them.

we don’t know anything about this person

Well yes we do, hence the comment. We know that this person was apparently a creationist who was the head of a science department in a well regarded school. And we are told that she apparently didn’t teach creationism to her students. What she taught her students she must have therefore have perceived to be a lie.

The previous Pope allowed gluten free host and so far as I know that hasn’t been overturned.

😊 Yeah I don’t think the Catholic church claims that when Christ said to apostles at the Last Supper take this for it is my body and blood which will be given up for the forgiveness of sins that they are claiming he actually gave them each a piece of his flesh.

If you believe that God is an all-powerful omnipotent being then appearing in the form of a gluten free host isn’t going to be a problem.

Georges Lemaitre was a devout Catholic priest who believed in transubstantiation and came up with the Big Bang Theory. It might not sit comfortably with your preferred narrative but that is the fact.

And if you are unhappy about that you will be gutted when you hear about the person they call “the father of modern genetics”.

my real point is there is little or no difference between believing in something with no proof that is simply a product of your upbringing and most conspiracy theories.

So you keep saying. Saying the same thing over and over doesn’t make it any more than just your opinion.

Article on Radio4 yesterday and this morning about The Light – only caught a few minutes.

We know that this person was apparently a creationist who was the head of a science department in a well regarded school. And we are told that she apparently didn’t teach creationism to her students. What she taught her students she must have therefore have perceived to be a lie.

What is creationism? That the world popped into existence over 6 days? Or that the 6 days is not to be taken literally and God created the world using natural mechanisms (including evolution) over millions of years, equivalent to 6 days in some spiritual/metaphysical sense?

It’s not a simple answer, I once read a great book (by a religious Jewish rabbi) going into this in detail.

Suffice to say she did not necessarily have to be teaching a lie.

What is the “nature” of god for you’re FiL?? Is it a supreme being who created the universe and to whom we therefore owe some respect and tradition or does he really believe Moses lived to 400 and the walls of Jericho literally fell with a trumpet and carrying a box round them? etc.

Moses lived to 120 😉

Again, various levels of taking it literally, but yes the basis is something like “don’t take it literally, but believe that it could be literal and that is one explanation”.

we don’t know anything about this person
Well yes we do, hence the comment

My point was we don’t know enough about the teacher to surmise they’re a bad at their job, that they lie everyday to their pupils and themselves, that their faith is not strong, and the school must not be reputable for continuing to employ them!!!!!!

Article on Radio4 yesterday and this morning about The Light – only caught a few minutes.

Marianna in Conspiracyland

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001mssm

What is creationism? That the world popped into existence over 6 days?

Yeah that one. That is the widely recognised definition of a creationist. If the person in question believed that the world was created over billion of years then it would have been pointless to even mention her, it is generally a given that science teachers accept that the world was formed over billions of years.

My point was we don’t know enough about the teacher to surmise they’re a bad at their job

No one has claimed that she was bad at her job. The point I was making is that I am struggling to believe that she was particularly good at it. I can’t but think that teachers who actually believe what they are teaching probably make better teachers. Would you have much confidence in a physics teacher that didn’t believe in gravity?

Yes, young earth creationist as in thinks the world is ~6k years old.

All ‘well regarded’ really means in this context is ‘gets good exam results, does well at OFSTED inspections’. Given she was (now retired) senior member of the team that got those results, she couldn’t have been too bad at her job at least in that narrow sense. I don’t think she would have thought that she was teaching a lie either. She’d say that when science and her reglion conflict, she believes the science to be ‘valid’, but the religion to be ‘correct’. That was mainly evolution and big bang etc – that leaves a lot of science to teach without conflict. She would be able to explain plenty of methods to date the earth for example, and what the outputs of of  those methods are (>>> 6k years). But she’d be equally able to put those outputs in the bin because jeebus.

To bring the conversation full circle, her husband (my dads brother) is an avid reader of The Light. We’ve lost touch with them now, he became too difficult to deal with, constantly ranting about jews running the world etc.

nickc

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. […] This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called “Lord God” παντοκρατωρ [pantokratōr], or “Universal Ruler”. […] The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, [and] absolutely perfect

so said Issac Newton. Principia is dedicated to essentially working out the Maths that God must use to make the universe work. I find that idea that you think these people didn’t understand fully that their God existed and guided their hand beyond ridiculous. (and just a wee bit arrogant)

Unless you subscribe the the conspiracy theory that his diaries are faked and the dating of the ink and paper and handwriting analysis is a conspiracy then whatever Newton said about religion in public was because he preferred not to have a Christian execution and be burned alive for heresy. He was also a practicing alchemist which also carried a capital sentence if less brutal than the Christian one.

Whatever god he perceived may or may not exist was most certainly not the Christian one

What is it with Jews? Why is antisemitism even a thing?

I’d like to think I’m reasonably intelligent but there are some frankly embarrassingly large holes in my knowledge. Like the whole “troubles” in Northern Ireland, two different schisms of Christianity blowing each other up because they worship the same god in slightly different ways. I’m sure it’s far more complex than that but I don’t get it, I never have. But that’s probably another thread.

Similarly, I have no doubt that “it’s complicated” but the Jewish seem to be a weird demographic to hate. I genuinely don’t understand. I have a couple of friends who are Jewish, they’re lovely. I cannot get behind ritual genital surgery on infants and half of what she posts on Facebook might as well be in a foreign language, but other than that what’s to dislike? Is that it, it’s a different culture so it’s Othering? She spends most of her time baking and knitting. Those evil, evil cakes.

I’m not far from North Manchester which has a thriving community of Orthodox Jews. You have to wear black and can’t cut your hair? Where do I sign?

Whatever Newton said about religion in public was because

…he believed in it. Honestly, he really did.

I understand that that may be inconceivable to you, but making up history becasue the truth doesn’t (or cant) fit your world view, is a wild take.

What is it with Jews? Why is antisemitism even a thing?

You know that bit in the Bible, where you finish one half and you turn the last page of Malachi, and it says “New Testament”?

That.

What is creationism? That the world popped into existence over 6 days?

what they said was …

a young earth creationist

This specifically means the universe popped into existence over 6 days 6,000 years ago and god (or devil) created fossils and all dating methods that proved differently at the same time.

…he believed in it. Honestly, he really did.

Then why did he write tens of thousands of pages to the contrary ?

Do you actually believe his diaries are real or do you think they are a fake or something ???

Then why did he write tens of thousands of pages to the contrary ?

He believed in the Biblical God. However you want to spin it to fit your narrative, that is pretty much the start middle and finish of it.

You know that bit in the Bible, where you finish one half and you turn the last page of Malachi, and it says “New Testament”?

Not really, no.

I thought we’d all dismissed the OT as “yeah, oops, what were we thinking” now anyway?

I went to college with Malachi. True story.

What is it with Jews? Why is antisemitism even a thing?

You know that bit in the Bible, where you finish one half and you turn the last page of Malachi, and it says “New Testament”?

That.

Eh? The Old Testament is full of stuff about the persecution of Jews. Don’t tell me that you are unaware of the Assyrian captivity, Babylonian exile, or Seleucid Empire?

Have a butchers at the Book of Exodus and Moses and enslavement in Egypt, it’s quite famous! Also the Book of Daniel which is set in the 6th century BC and whose central message is that God will deliver Israel from oppression.

I’ve got 4 days driving someone around at work next week who is deep into the rabbit hole

Is his name Warren?

Is his name Warren?

Oh, well done that man! 🎩🎯

two different schisms of Christianity blowing each other up because they worship the same god in slightly different ways.

Just don’t get started on the convoluted factions of Islam who have been happily slaughtering each other for centuries because they can’t agree on which members of their prophets family has the right to be head of the faith.

Their name isn’t Warren and I never said they were a he. ,😜

They’re an otherwise nice enough person until they get started on 5g, and controlling governments, vaccines, cashless societies.

factions of Islam who have been happily slaughtering each other for centuries

How many centuries of peace has Europe had? Whilst religion is often used as an excuse it rarely is the reason for wars, the quest for power and wealth is.

The Ottoman Empire, which btw welcomed Jews that were expelled from Europe due to religious hatred, lived much of its 600 year history in relative peace.

Indeed that fact played a significant part in the Ottoman Empire’s eventual downfall – whilst Europeans were in a constant state of war, either with each other or with other people across the globe, the relative peace that Islamic Empire enjoyed meant that its military fell behind that of warmongering European states, leading to its eventual downfall and European conquest/control.

I would be interested in any evidence that Muslim countries have a greater predisposition to go to war with each other than non-Muslim countries.

Indeed that fact played a significant part in the Ottoman Empire’s eventual downfall –

Shame its about as accurate as claiming Newton wasnt a believer.
The Ottoman Empire was an extremely aggressive empire for over half of its existence waging continued wars of expansion as well as an aggressive slave trading policy.
This only halted when the states it was attacking started to become modern states especially Russia and Austria.
The only real period of peace was a few years when it had been pushed back but the other countries were consolidating.
After that it was on the back foot.

Whatever god he perceived may or may not exist was most certainly not the Christian one

All his views were based on the Christian bible. Admittedly some of his private opinions were rather unorthodox and even heretical in the eyes of some other Christians but he was definitely a believer in a version of the Christian god.