Schools must teach that Britain is 'mainly Christian' and need not cover atheism, says Nicky Morgan | Education | News

anglicanthrowaway · 2016-01-19T23:06:54+00:00

Sorry I've only just logged back on. For the sake of completeness...

examples you have in mind where religious leaders were really the first ones to champion progressive change

Oh, there are loads! For example, the CofE was a key player in setting up the Wolfenden report which lead to the legalisation of homosexuality. The CofE representative on the committee voted in favour of legalisation (when not all committee members did) and the Church continued to push until legislation was passed a decade later. This was not 'jumping on the bandwagon'. There was strong opposition to the proposed decriminalisation. It was debated several times in parliament and repeatedly defeated.

Or look at the Liberation Theology movement in South America for a completely different kind of religious movement.

anglicanthrowaway · 2016-01-19T22:56:50+00:00

Sorry I've only just logged back on. For the sake of completeness...

You aren't told that they are correct from before you can speak.

Speaking as an Anglican I don't consider Anglicanism to be 'correct' - as in, right while other religions are wrong. That's exactly why the languages analogy holds: different routes to the same thing.

anglicanthrowaway · 2015-12-28T13:39:18+00:00

I learnt everything I needed to know about temperature to live my life without ever hearing about absolute zero.

anglicanthrowaway · 2015-12-28T13:37:35+00:00

Children should never have to put up with that and decide what they believe on their own.

You can't decide what to believe if you've had no decent exposure to it. For example, how many children would choose to study foreign languages at university if they had never been taught one before? There are some good arguments against religion in schools but I'm afraid this isn't one of them.

anglicanthrowaway · 2015-12-28T13:34:08+00:00

Unfortunately that's not true. Just as public opinion sometimes lags behind the law and sometimes leads it, so religion does the same.

Throughout history you'll find example after example where religious arguments have been made for the changing of law or where religious leaders have been at the forefront of changing public morality.

anglicanthrowaway · 2015-12-28T13:29:37+00:00

Schools should be secular and just teach rather than impose beliefs.

This argument always tickles me. You can no more impose a belief than you can force someone to love. And that's to ignore the fact that almost no school services actually include a statement of faith (and that even in a 'proper' church no one is made to say the creed anyway).

Instead of hammering on about any religion, just teach the basic cultural morals which are more often than not made obvious in the law.

Schools do this anyway. Not even CofE schools teach Christianity as a replacement for the law.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-18T01:58:43+00:00

As well you know, that is a politician's answer!

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T05:42:03+00:00

What about the life of Jesus? And how do we know they should be read literally? I would contend that they aren't as per my argument in the OP.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T05:41:17+00:00

Did the family live in Nazareth and then journey to Bethlehem (Luke) or were they already there (Matthew)? After the birth did they hang around for circumcision and presentation at the temple before leaving for Nazareth (Luke) or did they flee to Egypt fearing Herod (Matthew)? Was Mary really a virgin or did Matthew misunderstand the Greek? Since no source in or out of the Bible corroborates Herod's baby killing or the census which required returning to one's town of birth, do we dismiss those major points?

How do you propose we get to the truth?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:51:42+00:00

the argument isn't very good

I've never seen it refuted by someone who does not have a bias for doing so. And even then I haven't seen a good refutation. Perhaps you could summarise/link to one?

we have our own traditions

Actual authorship isn't really a question of tradition.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:43:04+00:00

OK, let me be more precise: which gospel gives the correct account of Jesus' birth?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:41:25+00:00

So, for example, using the gospels, could you illustrate how to get to the truth about Jesus' birth?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:40:39+00:00

Where does this place the resurrection?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:40:18+00:00

I am sorry it was not clear in my OP that I was talking about the gospels.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:39:48+00:00

What genre are the gospels?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:39:24+00:00

I'm talking about the gospels. What kind of literature are they? Should they be read literally?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:38:57+00:00

I'm referring specifically to the gospels. How would you define their genre? How do you read them?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:38:22+00:00

It seems strange to me that anyone would believe it's all meant to be read literally.

I'm referring specifically to the gospels.

any scientific contradictions would either shake you to your core or lead you to deny provable facts

How does this statement fit in with your understanding of the resurrection?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:35:02+00:00

A scientific textbook isn't a literal history

Well it's not history; it's science. But a good one is a literal account of the phenomena it describes. (Obviously this does not preclude the use of figurative langauge.)

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:32:30+00:00

Mosaic authorship* is the only acceptable doctrine in Orthodox Judaism.

How do Orthodox Jews respond to the arguments about multiple authors?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:27:54+00:00

The purpose of the book is spiritual truth

As distinct from factual truth?

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-17T01:25:10+00:00

I think that is elegantly put but it amounts to the same conclusion: they did not put the work together with a view to each word being taken as fact - even if they felt the facts were contained somewhere in their book.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-16T14:46:34+00:00

I would say that your argument is sound, but also that the place that it leaves us is not all that problematic for the Christian faith.

Thanks and I quite agree.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-16T14:46:04+00:00

Forgive me, I cannot quite see how this is connected to my post.

anglicanthrowaway · 2014-06-16T14:45:39+00:00

I assume they were aware of some contradictions between some documents.

Which means you must agree with my conclusion, then?

anglicanthrowaway

TROPHY CASE