Posted on 12/01/2005 11:47:39 AM PST by Sub-Driver
In a church service? No, I would not, but they are welcome to be present and speak up in a class room environment, or a Sunday School class. Sure they are welcome, but I would doubt they would come.
Now back to this course: I would like to take this course and challenge every falsehood that this professor mentions. I would definitely stand up for the creationist's point of view. Professors like this get away with everything because few people want to challenge them and affect their grades, or maybe peer pressure causes them to just be quiet. That would be the least of my concerns. I would ask the professor back up every point that goes against creation, like he would really know, ha! Of course, I would be courteous, but firm in my requests. I am not for loud-mouth actions. I really enjoy hearing 'so-called smart intelligent' people like this prove what little they really know, so that is what would make this an exciting class for me.
I was told by a Kansan that the class was "withdrawn" rather than cancelled and may be given with someone else teaching it.
Um, rawhide, the course wasn't a biology course. YOu'd have wasted your hard-earned money.
Esp since if I taught the course, I'd treat the christian creation myth on equal footing with the 100 or so other top creation myths, and you would sit there and stew (and, oh, perhaps maybe even learn a little something like how your creation myth contains bits and peices of many other creation myths that predate yours by millenia. As if by maaagic.)
But no, you would have only enrolled to be a disruptor. So I'd just fail your ass. Until you withdrew in the nick of time, of course.
Sorry, professor, I would enjoy being in your class. Would you care to tell everyone where you teach, if you even do? Yes, I would be a courteous disruptor for the cause of creation vs your pack of lies. You need more faith to believe in your pack of lies, than I do with the creation story. And if you go back to my first post, I would withdraw before you could fail me, ha! But maybe I would accept the failing grade just to stick it out to the end with you. And you call it a waste of money, but I call it a balance to the what you be teaching the other students, and maybe some would not be so gullible to believe your lies, which is all you would be teaching.
So, Rawhide, you would have made the profs life miserable.
You know something about creation, resurrection and flood myths that the rest of us don't, perhaps? New aspects of monotheism in dynastic Egypt? A previously unknown and unanticipated Sumerian translation? New insights on the development of winter solstice myths or agriculture and resurrection myths?
And with this wonderful knowledge that you alone possess, rather than share it respectfully with fellow scholars, you would make the profs life miserable. That would be your goal?
I don't think you would last long in the class. It's not like public school. Disprutors can be tossed. I think you need a reality check on how college classes work.
You (Rawhide) don't seem to get it.
If the prof is teaching, say, commonalities among New and Old world agricultural resurrection myths, you don't get to disrupt and say the others are wrong. You're there to find out what they are.
Your fellow students will shut you up even before the prof tosses you out.
"Too bad this person is not really interested in teaching, only in posturing"
Well said!
If you call a student 'a disruptor' who disagrees with a professor because he is teaching nothing but lies, then I would gladly wear that label. I would have been courteous but firm in my discussions. I would not let this professor get away with spreading his lies. Too many times, these liberal professors get away with filling the minds up of impressionable students without so much of a peep from the students. Well, I read this professor's challenge from his comment that I posted, and I would gladly accept it. to be a part of his class and discussions. I would not fear getting tossed, nor being told to shut up. It is obvious that this guy has an agenda.
Your post spent a lot of words repeating your prior points.
Unfortunately, you failed to respond to my post other than to question my credentials.
Not only have I taught in college, I taught a specific class in biology for non-science majors.
When the creationism issue came up (only once in a serious way) I explained that the student was in my class to learn what scientists thought. There was no problem since the student involved could see my point. We did have a few interesting after class discussions.
I know what the Bible teaches about all this and it surely is not lies. Are you telling me that I should not believe the creation story as written in the Bible? Have you research enough to disprove the story of creation as detailed in the Bible? No you have not. Instead, you choose by your own free will to accept the theories and writings of others who choose to believe anything else but the truth as written in the Bible. Why is it so hard for you to accept the creation story?
If you have read my posts, I said I would be courteous. I would share this wonderful knowledge I possess, most definitely. But I would challenge in class a professor who stated goal was to bring a 'slap' across the face on any who dared believe differently than himself. The professor would find I am not one to back down and accept his lies to be taught as truth. That would be my goal, yes. Signed, your courteous 'disruptor'.
How about the global flood, said to have occurred about 4200 years ago. Believe that?
Thanks. There's an interesting comparative-religions or comparative-literature course that could be done on this topic, but Prof. Mirecki's comments indicate that he's not interested in an objective survey of the material, absent a political agenda.
Absolutely, absolutely, I believe that. No doubt at all about that.
(not sure about the 4200 year figure, though. Never been an issue with me, as far as the time it occurred, I just know it did)
Where does belief enter into it?
A course like this goes over the best information we have regarding these subjects.
Just precisely what is your problem with this? Do you want a class that is supposed to study comparisons to confine itself to only one sample?
And, BTW, don't waste any more effort on my personal religion. It's not what you seem to think it is and it's none of your business.
I read your posts. Including this one: (post 8)
"Dang, I would have loved taking this course. I would have failed, but I would have made the professor life miserable."
Absolutely, absolutely, I believe that. No doubt at all about that.
(not sure about the 4200 year figure, though. Never been an issue with me, as far as the time it occurred, I just know it did)
My sources for the about 4200 year figure are:
2252 BC -- layevangelism.com
2304 BC -- Answers in Genesis (+/- 11 years).
2350 BC -- Morris, H. Biblical Creationism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993.
The problem I see is that in the western US where I work (as an archaeologist) we have an unbroken series of radiocarbon dates from numerous occupation sites that span that period. There is no sign of a flood of the necessary magnitude, no sign of disruption of occupation sites what would occur with a flood of that magnitude, and continuity of mtDNA across that entire time period.
Unfortunately, when you start out with teaching lies, your whole course is tainted. You mentioned that this course is taught with 'the best information we have regarding these subjects'. What you are teaching is man's best guess theories on these subjects. That does not make it true, just because these men may have many degrees behind them. These 'brilliant minds' are set out with a particular agenda in mind, and that is to teach the creation story cannot be correct, and their theory is the one to be believe. The truth be damned, it is more important to spread a lie, than that the creation story be shown to be the truth. And anyone presenting these theories as examples as to leading one to the truth of our creation, apart from what is taught in the Bible, is misguiding many students.
Okay, okay, gee whiz, let me explain 'miserable'. I would be courteous, polite, but firm in my opposition to what he would be teaching. The professor would find I would not be one to back down. He would not find in me an empty vessel where he can just pour his lies into. I would challenged him on every front. Like I said, this would be done courteously and polite. But I venture to say the professor would probably not respond to me in kind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.