Your satire would be more enjoyable, Pericles, if you were accurately describing the views of others.

Those two quotes you just posted actually have nothing to do with literal or non literal.

"Based on the subjective?" Of course. One needs to subjectively interpret the evidence to come to a conclusion on this.

"Doing so in ways we don't comprehend?" Again, of course. I wouldn't expect to comprehend how God raised Jesus from the dead. Again, nothing to do with literal vs non literal.

Anyway, the gospels make it perfectly clear that these are historical events they're purporting to record. Check out the start of Luke's gospel, for example.

The Apostle Paul said it best when he commented that if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, our faith is in vain. That's why this is important for a Christian.

but dan, i thought we'd just decided my christian friends weren't christian after all, degrees in theology notwithstanding. oh well, i'll go tell them they're back in the fold.

and they know full well my motivation. i am intrigued how otherwise rational people can believe nonsense, and can plead so specially in order to justify their beliefs.

The Easter Bunny, Santa and the Tooth Fairy stories give joy and excitement to many children. These myths are harmless to children knowing that by their middle-primary school years they’ll realise the absurdity and untenability of their beliefs.

However, accepting beliefs in miracles and literal interpretations of Biblical stories are categorically different. Religious teaching, stamped with the persuasive imprimatur of our churches, schools, families and social customs inhibit the questioning the veracity of Biblical teachings which can be false and dangerous in that unscientific assertions and principles of behaviour and ethics are accepted without question. This is akin to finding life’s answers hiding in astrology, clairvoyance, quack medicines or any set of rules developed without the scientific process of hypothesising and testing. Quoting from the scriptures to prove the truth of miracles merely begs the question. It’s the scriptures themselves that cannot withstand the scientific process. Religious education is about ‘faith and belief’, not ‘scientific knowledge’. ‘Intelligent Design’ is the former: ‘Theory of Evolution’ is the latter. Despite the use of the word ‘theory’, evolution is continually being scrutinised and verified scientifically; but not so with religion.

An example: the comparative study of languages reveals how diverse and interconnected human races have become. But in my role as a teacher I have never hesitated in explaining that differences in race and language were not a result of God’s ‘Tower Of Babel’. Babel is a good yarn and readily accepted as fact by those not treading the path of education.

‘Religious Education’ is oxymoronic. While ‘education’ encourages the processes of enquiry, scepticism, hypothesising, testing and learning as a valuable end-in-itself, ‘religious education’ tends towards ‘training’ or ‘brainwashing’ with pre-packaged answers and doctrines of correct behaviours and morals.

Phil’s right. Religion is not doing justice to the process of education. Miracles belong in the light-hearted good-yarn basket along with Santa. Religious training can only be exposed to those able understand the fantasy of the Biblical metaphors and knowing that the stories of miracles is merely a sham to keep the troops in order.

Well, reading this and a couple of other contributions, I must wonder who is proselytizing here. I can try to explain my world-view to those interested, however denigrating other world views by calling them irrational, not suited to be educated into, etc. is another thing.

I do not see trav saying “Education without religion is oxymoronic. While ‘education’ encourages the processes of enquiry, scepticism, hypothesising, testing and learning as a valuable end-in-itself, ‘anti-religious education’ tends towards ‘training’ or ‘brainwashing’ with pre-packaged answers ... humanist education attacking religion is not doing justice to the process of education.“

Bushbasher,
When you say ‘we’, I’d prefer it if you just said ‘I’. Please, don’t include me in your decision making. First you want to tell your friends they’re not Christians. Now you want them back in the fold. On what basis are you making such judgements? And why would your Christian friends take theological advice from an atheist?

Fractelle,
No Christian is asking you to worship aliens. The word alien implies unfamiliar or foreigner. The creator of the world is anything but unfamiliar with or foreign to it.

Pericles (more than an onlooker),
You seem to suggest that my quote shares something with the quote from Sells but I don’t see what. (I’m also not sure if you finished Sell’s sentence, which makes grasping it tougher.)

Fashionable or non-fashionable, nobody takes or ever took the Gospels in a strictly literal manner. Anyone who’s read them knows that they contain different amounts of history, prophecy, parable, metaphor, hyperbole, poetry, etc. This is not to say that these grammatical classes or the overall meaning is difficult to discern. The death and resurrection of Jesus, being the central focus of the four Gospels, can in no way be interpreted as allegory or myth, at least not within the clear intention of the authors.

Bronhill1,
You claim good education encourages scepticism. Are we allowed to be sceptical about evolution?

Last year Ben Stein produced a movie showing how any scepticism towards evolution in many academic institutions is not tolerated. Instead we have only rigid orthodoxy. Universities were once the bastions of free speech. He asks, “Why do we allow, even celebrate, dissent in every other area of society, but not here?”

You’ve said that you’ve explained to students that differences in race and language were not a result of the Tower Of Babel. I am sceptical. Can you now explain your reasoning to me. How do you know this for certain?

bronhill1...[claiming to be a teacher]..is likely teaching your kids<<..Despite the use of the word‘theory’,..evolution is continually being scrutinised and verified scientifically;..but not so with religion.>>oh dear what are we doing here lol,..if this debate isnt scruiteny then what is?

>>An example:the comparative study of languages reveals how diverse and interconnected human races have become.>>wow thats scruitiny and verifying..lol,it isnt even a logical comparison[diverse yet interconected sounds like a buzz word parroted out unthinkingly

[were also mixing races with languages,so were talking about scatterd[diverse]..first people language..[that arnt as interconnected as the interconected races in your small town are

<<I have never hesitated in explaining that differences in race and language were not a result of God’s..‘Tower Of Babel’>>oh dear''teacher''..the story reveals men built it NOT GOD..[how does your logic [lol]..deem it gods tower,mindless parroting bias comes to mind

<<..readily accepted as fact by those not treading the path of education.>>you clearly havnt sat in on any real religious debates..lol

<<While‘education’encourages the processes of enquiry,scepticism, hypothesising,testing and learning as a valuable>>..what poppy cock, heard of peer presure[questioning evolution gets you a fail mark[instantly]because you mindless parrots think it science

[forgetting its really theory]...faith based peer‘brainwashing’with pre-packaged answers and doctrines of correct behaviours and morals...describes the current education..precicly..[if its not in the teachers edition DONT TEACH it]

<<knowing that the stories of miracles is merely a sham>>begins by revealing the other shams..[evolution of species..[NOT GENUS]...validate evolution of genus,

dont teach kids that its science if its not faulsifyable science/fact
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2305
havnt seen you at the current debate
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2679&page=0