The Bible should be brought back into the classroom.

[Questatement]

Now there's the Christian charm.

You know what they say about what to expect when asking stupid questions :)

[arX]

You're so right because backing up one's assumptions is such a silly thing to request.

[Questatement]

It is obviously a passage written by an ignorant man who thought the moon was it's own source of light. A complete contradiction to what science has shown us.

Wouldn't a better definition of 'obviously' be if they clearly stated that the moon was its own light source, just as the sun is instead of something which, in context, has no intent of defining light properties and everything to do with functionality for man to effectively manage said creation?

[Questatement]

There's no "best", what a silly notion; they're all equally wrong.

Then I will presume that you have nothing with which to adequately support your claim which you are personally capable of arguing to some conclusion.

[arX]

Then I will presume that you have nothing with which to adequately support your claim which you are personally capable of arguing to some conclusion.

What?

[Questatement]

What?

Yep, and while you're thinking on that one, where is your evidence to support Newton invoking the spirtual in his transmutation writings?

[SoylentGreen]

So, education only counts if it results in a "degree"? Do you not understand that there is more to the idea of education than a formal process that results in an official degree? Do you not understand that there are many laymen and autodidacts that are better educated than professors, despite their impressive degrees and awards?

In conclusion, I am complete agreement with this thought, expressed by Jefferson, and quoted by another poster:

"...shake off all the fears & servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion."

No I just find it absurd that you think that having schools some how magically stops people from learning anything else anywhere else. What a load of shit. I am thinking perhaps you are under the misapprehension that schools teach what to think, and perhaps they do where you are. But a real educational facility will concentrate on teaching kids how to think, a skill that will enable them to learn wherever they are. Again you blame the institution for what is nothing more than your lack of understanding.

In this country, the state has appropriated the functions of public education.

Yes, but as often said, when looking for good ideas and way to do things in the social sense then who in their right minds would bother to look at what a socially backwards country like america is doing.

So be it. But why leave religion off the curriculum?

I have made one compalint about it and you have not given any thought to it.

Where in the curriculum should religion be? Is it to be taught with the other social sciences such as history along with greek history and their gods. Is it to be taught in liberal classes such as english along with shakespeare. Or should it be taught with the hard sciences along with evolution.
As I have said, many countries do teach the bible but not as fact, which IMO is the reaql argument here, not whether it be taught but how.

That leaves religious education in the hands of religious organizations.

Exactly where it belongs or are you suggesting that science should also be teaching religion?

These are precisely the last people who I would want to leave this up to. They have an agenda, after all.

Yes, that would be an agenda to teach religion. Scientist have a similar agenda for science , so do historians, bioligists, gym teachers. etc.

[SoylentGreen]

Wouldn't a better definition of 'obviously' be if they clearly stated that the moon was its own light source, just as the sun is instead of something which, in context, has no intent of defining light properties and everything to do with functionality for man to effectively manage said creation?

But it does clearly state, Have you never read the bible?

Genesis 1:16 says "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
But there are not two great lights, the moon is not the same source of light as the sun.

Although I do realise that the only shot you have at making your ridiculous statement about the bible not contradicting science true is by the continuous dishonest use of the shifting the goal post fallacy, it will not work for you. Your bible was written by a man who did not have a clue that the moon only reflects light. And in his ignorance he wrote that his imaginary friend created two light sources. Science has since shown that he was wrong.

Explain to me how does man effectively manage when he cannot even get correct information but must rely on badly interpreted observation of absolutely no scientific value or containing any truth?

[Questatement]

I can think of no other reason that you would reject a legitimate usage of a word other than bias.

Carry on in your beliefs.

[arX]

Yep, and while you're thinking on that one, where is your evidence to support Newton invoking the spirtual in his transmutation writings?

While cringe-worthy, it's rather amusing that you're refusing to see anti-scientific irrationality in Newton's alchemy (it's ALCHEMY for goodness sake, haha) but I'll continue to play.

With regards to "spiritual" aspect of Newton's alchemy, here is a quote to support it:

"For if such an aethereal Spirit may be condensed in fermenting or burning
bodies (or otherwise inspissated in ye pores of ye earth to a tender matter
which may be as it were ye succus nutritious of ye earth or primary
substance out of which things generable grow) [or kind of a humid active
matter for the continuall uses of nature, adhering to the sides of those
pores after the manner that vapours condense on the sides of a Vessell
subtly set]; the vast body of the Earth, who may be every where to the
very center in perpetual working, may continually condense so much of
this Spirit as to cause it from above to descend with great celerity for a
supply."

The foundations of Newton's alchemy, or, "The hunting of the greene lyon" - Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs - Google Books

Now you can return the favour, stop evading and actually respond to at least one of the bible claims that I've brought up.

[Questatement]

While cringe-worthy, it's rather amusing that you're refusing to see anti-scientific irrationality in Newton's alchemy (it's ALCHEMY for goodness sake, haha) but I'll continue to play.

With regards to "spiritual" aspect of Newton's alchemy, here is a quote to support it:

"For if such an aethereal Spirit may be condensed in fermenting or burning
bodies (or otherwise inspissated in ye pores of ye earth to a tender matter
which may be as it were ye succus nutritious of ye earth or primary
substance out of which things generable grow) [or kind of a humid active
matter for the continuall uses of nature, adhering to the sides of those
pores after the manner that vapours condense on the sides of a Vessell
subtly set]; the vast body of the Earth, who may be every where to the
very center in perpetual working, may continually condense so much of
this Spirit as to cause it from above to descend with great celerity for a
supply."

Sorry, you only get one free, 17th century English lesson. A second one will cost you an admission of defeat on the first one.

Now you can return the favour, stop evading and actually respond to at least one of the bible claims that I've brought up.

'Four corners of the earth.' Do you have any idea how rehashed, antiquated, and utterly bankrupt this argument is?

The Hebrew word for corner, 'Kanaph,' is translated in a variety of ways. However, it generally means extremity.

Num. 15:38 - borders
Job 37:3 - ends
2 Chron. 3:13 - span
1 Sam 24:5 - edge
2 Chron. 5:8 - extended

Now, considering that the bible teaches that the earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:10), there is no logical way to chose a literal 'corner' as the proper translation in relation to the earth and/or land.

The Greek equivalent in Rev. 7:1 is 'Gonia' and is more closely related to our modern divisions known as quadrants. Gonia literally means angles, or divisions. It is, and always has been since earliest known history, customary to divide a map into quadrants as shown by the four directions.

[arX]

The Hebrew word for corner,

Ha yes let's redefine the Hebrew word for corner by starting the redefinition with "the Hebrew word for corner...."!

Now, considering that the bible teaches that the earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:10)

It doesn't, that passage says it's a circle. A circle is not a sphere. (How much should I charge you for this lesson?)

You've provided another contradiction and, shock-horror!, an inconsistency within the bible itself.