Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaneuf3
With teaching religion as with anything they should probably stick to provable facts.
"It is a fact that Christians believe <xyz>"
"It is a fact that the Koran says <abc>"
"It is a fact that the belief that <jkl> held by group <qwe> contributed to historical event <rty>" |
Yep, I think we all agree on this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaneuf3
Those types of statements are provable and factual. Getting into stuff like: "Christians are wrong because god doesn't exist" like you suggest is probably not a good idea to teach at a university because its not a provable fact. Its the same reason they don't teach "Christians are right because god exists". If you want that type of discussion go to a church, temple, cult meeting, athiest internet message board, or whatever.
Something could be said for going through history to find links/contradictions to religious stories (i.e. "There has been no evidence found thus far to show a worldwide flood occurred at approx. 4000 BC")
|
This is more what I'm talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaneuf3
but to include stuff like "But of course, all of this is ######ed nonsense and if you believe a virgin can give birth do a god's child you're not firing on all cylinders lulz lmao lol." would be wrong. It all goes back to facts which you're able to prove.
|
This is where a religious bias is not helpful to scholarly study. A scholarly study on religion should check any bias at the door, religious or atheist. The goal of the offshoot I wish existed would be an objective study of religious claims.
It is beyond easy to prove a virgin cannot give birth to a god. This is absolutely undebateable. Just ask a grade five sexual education student how a baby is made if you need proof.
