[Closed] Right to be peeved? Kids nativity content

Easter is already its pagan name

According to Wiki, by the time it was adopted it was simply the term for April when Easter generally falls. The actual christian festival has a direct link to the Jewish festival of Passover. The story of the resurrection takes place when Jesus is in Jerusalem to celebrate Passover. Many other countries adopt a word that derives from the Latin for Passover, such as La Pascale in French (also one of the nick names for Paris Roubaix). Whatever it is called it should fall at the same time (unless you are a member of one of the Orthodox church who have stuck with the Gregorian calendar).

Is believing in Intelligent design a prerequisite to believing in god?

I don't think so.

There's God, and there's the Bible - if you don't believe that the Bible is the literal word of God then you are free to treat it however you like - as parables, stories or scholarly writing. I think Old testament is treated this way by Jews afaik.

I thought that treating the bible as a literal truth was a fairly modern thing; the book as intended as guide to be interpreted hence "bible lessons"

Is believing in Intelligent design a prerequisite to believing in god?

I guess it depends upon how you define Intelligent Design, but it is most associated with creationists, so certainly in this country the answer would be very much no.

I know people who believe in both God and big bang theory. Since no-one knows anything about why the big bang happened and what happened before it, if such a concept even exists, then there's absolutely tons of room for God. It could've been absolutely anything, all theories are about as valid as each other in this respect.

It's also possible to beleive in God and Jesus without having to believe that the bible is a particularly accurate account of the events surrounding Jesus.

Bencooper: do you think that the nativity play was part of the formal curriculum (as that term is properly understood by educators)?

It was held in normal school hours, as were the dress rehearsals etc, so I'm going to go with yes - though I don't know what definition educators would use.

OP. I think you acted accordingly. I don't think the school should be booking David Icke for Crassmass talks after a school play, we need more people to speak up, we already have loads and loads of sheep who accept the staus quo just 'because'.

Christmas is very clearly for Christians. Don't choke while stuffing your greedy chops in the name of Cheesarse.

which bit of "we just happened" offends which law of thermodynamics?

What confusion? I thought the issue was we don't live in an open system unless you are happy with the concept of infinite.

The law of thermodynamics doesn't explain everything it just explains what happens in a closed system, that is what it is, there is no extrapolation into everything, into life the universe or any other bullshit.

and maybe it's wrong, I don't care if it is, that's science and we keep advancing and keep correcting, and keep understanding that we need to learn more. But it is the best explanation we have and the thirst to learn more is the bedrock of real knowledge.

Christmas is very clearly for Christians

It very clearly isn't! A couple of weeks of excess, bingeing and extravagance is pretty much the exact opposite of what Jesus would want, I reckon!

It's a story, just like lots of other stories only it's also been heavily commercialised, you can't expect to enjoy Christmas without being 'educated' into the Nativity thing.

I don't know who I find most irritating Theists or Atheists, they're both unable to prove their point and howl fowl at each other.

Just go along with it, live and let live, for the moment you live in a Christian country that used to believe in all this, we all went through it, didn't stop us applying logic in later life and questioning the whole bollox of it all.
Hey if the next lot get control you'll be fasting, your mrs will be covered up and all manner of sharianess applied, won't you be moaning at that? No, probably not, they'd stone you.

If we have to have a religion taught to kids, then perhaps the turn the other cheek mob is the lessor of two evils.

My kids attend a CofE school. Eldest was 5 when he twigged that the Bible may not be true.

Hey if the next lot get control you'll be fasting, your mrs will be covered up and all manner of sharianess applied, won't you be moaning at that?

House! What do I win?

It very clearly isn't! A couple of weeks of excess, bingeing and extravagance is pretty much the exact opposite of what Jesus would want, I reckon!

Throw the shackles off friend, try starting by celebrating your secular christmas on the 26th or even the 29th if you're brave enough.. maybe change the name too; something like [b]'The Molgrips family Journey of life end of year reflection and celebration extravaganza event'[/b] and accept the new world with open arms.
You never know it might be fun and unique and represent you and yours a little better while also pulling away from Crassmas nonsense.

House! What do I win?.

"Just go along with it, live and let live, for the moment you live in a Christian country"
Apart from the fact it no longer is a Christian country how do you suppose it ever got to be a Christian Country?

Eldest was 5 when he twigged that the Bible may not be true

As is the case for many children. See the work of James Fowler and Scott Peck for stages of faith development.

That said, I'm sure you sought to expand his definition of 'true' by explaining various epistemological categories, and how empirical truth represents just one form.

I know people who believe in both God and big bang theory. Since no-one knows anything about why the big bang happened and what happened before it, if such a concept even exists, then there's absolutely tons of room for God. It could've been absolutely anything, all theories are about as valid as each other in this respect.

The great atheist/agnostic biologist [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould ]Stephen Jay Gould[/url] would agree with you whole-heartedly.

He, like many men of science, understood that faith and science were not two competing categories of thought.

^^ what I am forever saying. The 2 are not incompatible.

they really are separate

Faith is a a belief in a think known but not proven and science is the exact opposite as it seeks to remove the infinite error that faith can cause. I dont see how they could be more opposite tbh
Furthermore in each "universe" we have in one we have an all powerful deity that made everything and can controls all in the other we dont its just random shit,laws and time.
Only one of these accounts can be true.

"If you absolutely forced me to bet on the existence of a conventional anthropomorphic deity, of course I'd bet no. But, basically, Huxley was right when he said that agnosticism is the only honorable position because we really cannot know. And that's right. I'd be real surprised if there turned out to be a conventional God.

From your own link he really did not think or believe as you claim and neither do many men* [ sic] of science

I have known one devout evolutionary biologist but they were largely incoherent when they tried to reconcile these two beliefs. It really is one or the other though some agnostics and religious science types claim they can somehow co exist.

Christians have been trying to get in our midwinter festival for centuries, the sweet baby jeesus story is harmless enough, if the kids treat it like the gruffalo or aliens love underpants and other classics.
There's not really any need for a vicar to show up and start preaching tho, so it's fair enough to send an email. Unless they have appropriate clerics turn up for every religious festival, eid, diwali , hanuka etc in which case it's probably a really good school that will help toward creating an integrated and egalitarian society for all, rather than isolationism and ignorance.

try starting by celebrating your secular christmas on the 26th or even the 29th if you're brave enough

How do you know I don't? 🙂

Since I celebrate by eating lots, not working and generally indulging and having a good time, it lasts well over a week and starts on the 23rd. I may start calling it Saturnalia. Or maybe Bacchanalia.. 😉

but they were largely incoherent when they tried to reconcile these two beliefs

Incoherent to you, maybe 😉 but you aren't the one who has to understand it.

We have a celebration in the middle of winter because it's cold, dark, and generally shitty. We need to eat, drink, dance, and sing to stop ourselves from committing suicide while we're waiting for spring. Christians decided to confiscate the winter celebrations and turn it into a celebration of the birth of Christ.

Now that I've got a son I feel like I'm walking a tightrope. On the one hand I don't want any religious hocus pocus put in his head. When he asks me what happens when he dies I'm going to tell him he's dead and that's it (I may play around with the wording a bit). I don't want him being indoctrinated into the far easier to accept idea that we never really die.

On the other hand I don't want him to be the weird kid who has to go to a special room when the other kids are rehearsing because his parents don't want him involved in harmless religious activities.

So, I bite the bullet and just let him get on with it. But if some god botherer then got up and started throwing the fact that he'd gotten all the kids to dance to his tune in my face I would be very pissed off. So I'd say an email was the very least they could expect.

Only one of these accounts can be true.

As you know from past discussions on this question, I really can't agree with you.

I have used this analogy before, but we don't read the great poets and say, because their language is something other than empirically-verifiable, that what they said was not true. 'True' and 'false' do not come into it.

In some ways, I would argue that religion is like poetry. And as you will see in that video I posted a few posts back (on this thread), it is entirely possible to be both atheistic and agnostic, just as it is possible to be theistic and agnostic.

The categories we end up arguing on here so often oversimplify these and many other categories.

The only thing I think that should offend any of us is hatred and extremism in all areas of human activity, as opposed to some minister who talked about the Christian basis of Christmas at, well, Christmas.

Unless they have appropriate clerics turn up for every religious festival, eid, diwali , hanuka etc in which case it's probably a really good school that will help toward creating an integrated and egalitarian society for all, rather than isolationism and ignorance.

Fair enough. Or no clerics at all, as per Canada.

Anyway, science isn't necessarily all about "proof". It's about hypotheses and weight of evidence in favour or against.

Educated guesses then?
Like a religion but with an external faith system rather than an internal one?

[i]I hypothesise that god exists because...

The weight of evidence convinces me that god exists because...[/i]

are two sentences I've never heard uttered by a sane person.

I was talking about SCIENCE not religion!

Incoherent to you, maybe but you aren't the one who has to understand it.

True but it would have been more useful it at least made sense 😉

The only thing I think that should offend any of us is hatred and extremism in all areas of human activity, as opposed to some minister who talked about the Christian basis of Christmas at, well, Christmas.

Talking is fine expecting me to pray is another thing entirely and something i personally find oppressive - ok not really but you get the gist its up there with asking me to eat meat at a barbecue just because you are and its a barbecue.

TBH using aesthetics where there is no absolute truth is daft its an entirely binary choice we either have a science universe or a god universe we dont have a bit of both [quote=vickypea ]Anyway, science isn't necessarily all about "proof". It's about hypotheses and weight of evidence in favour or against.

which we call proof once we have enough evidence. you are technically correct but you get the point the alws of motion are true because they are true and we can prove i t

God is true because you think it and have no evidence.

Respectfully if you were to employ the approach of science to god you would find no data to support the hypothesis and if you were to apply faith to science you would have homeopathy, a heliocentric earth and a number of other unlikely outcomes

Science and religion aren't incompatible at all (sorry Johnnie Boy). They're [i]totally [/i]bedfellows.

However.

As science progresses, religion must continually be on the back foot, retconning "ah, well, it's all allegorical apart from the bits you haven't disproved yet" as we go.

Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

(In unrelated news, I'm utterly disappointed that I've been dropping pop culture references and quotes all day and no-one's picked up on any of them.)

^^ what I am forever saying. The 2 are not incompatible.

Anyway, science isn't necessarily all about "proof". It's about hypotheses and weight of evidence in favour or against.

I was talking about SCIENCE not religion!

So science is compatible with religion so long as you're not tied to the idea of testing hypotheses and weighing evidence?

So science is compatible with religion so long as you're not tied to the idea of testing hypotheses and weighing evidence?

Of course it's compatible. Some things you science about, some things you don't.

You can science yourself silly on the formation of the universe AFTER the big bang, and still have plenty of room for believing in God before it.

Two questions that God is a neat answer for:

1) Why are the fundamental constants the way they are to create complex structures in the universe that lead to matter and life?

2) Why did the big bang happen?

Note that I am not proposing God as an answer for these questions, I don't believe in God.

are two sentences I've never heard uttered by a sane person.

I've tried over and over again to explain that this is not necessarily the point, but you don't seem capable of understanding that. Ironic, when you're trying to make yourself out to be the clever one 🙂

There's a big difference between saying "We don't know what happened" and "The Purple Spaghetti Monster did it!"

If you're religious then you're conceding that there are some things that can't be explained by science. All your left with then is magic.

I've tried over and over again to explain that this is not necessarily the point, but you don't seem capable of understanding that. Ironic, when you're trying to make yourself out to be the clever one

I joined this thread less than an hour ago. What have you been trying to explain to me?

I went to kids nativity and afterwards endured the vicar spouting and the obligatory head down prayer but once it had finished that was it. The kids enjoyed themselves and so did the parents. Last thing on my mind would be to be posting a thread about it let alone emailing the bloody school I hope it's in the trash folder and the teachers are out on the lash this eve discussing some belltip that emailed earlier 😉

There's a big difference between saying "We don't know what happened" and "The Purple Spaghetti Monster did it!"

Likewise, there's a big difference that you all are missing between saying

"It was God that did it" and

"I believe that God did it"

If you're religious then you're conceding that there are some things that can't be explained by science.

Not at all! If God is real, he must have a basis on which He exists. This basis must be knowable by someone or something, if not by humans.

What have you been trying to explain to me?

This same debate has been going on for years. I forget who's been a part of it since I first joined in, so apologies if you've not been on a religious thread before.

Not at all! If God is real, he must have a basis on which He exists. This basis must be knowable by someone or something, if not by humans.

If you want to say that god is pretty much anything we don't understand or have no way of understanding at the moment then I guess that's fair enough.

I would just consider calling it something else because some people might think you're talking about the man with the big white beard who knows when I'm masturbating.

I didn't use to believe in God but now we have our own Christmas miracle; TJ has risen again (to judge by the arguing on this thread)!

I didn't use to believe in God but now we have our own Christmas miracle; TJ has risen again (to judge by the arguing on this thread)!

My work here is done 😀

Interesting thread.
My 2 eldest grand kids have the occasional interesting discussion around this time.
Sons daughter goes to a Catholic school because mum and her family are of that religion but don't actually go to church. DiL is a divorcee.
Grandsons(daughters son) father is a lapsed Jehovah(as are his sisters & brothers). He how ever would seem to know more about the Bible etc than grand daughter who attends the catholic school with its emphasis on religion?
MrsT & I are in theory Church of Scotland, kids live south of the border 😀

Likewise, there's a big difference that you all are missing between saying

"It was God that did it" and

"I believe that God did it"

The second coming of TJ would be a miracle indeed !

he is not the messiah he is a very naughty boy 😉

Wow.
I like the way you pitched it that the minister was attempting to 'convert' your son. It really brings out the increasing pitch and rising hysteria in your complete over reaction.

Pick your fights. Your life as a parent is going to be life-shortening and combatant if you got your big girl panties in such a twist over this.

My "rising hysteria" by sending one polite email? I don't think I'm the one being hysterical 😉

I wouldn't say that God is "pretty much anything we don't understand". As science progresses, and we understand more, the logical progression from that would be that God shrinks away to nothing.
God is supposed to be incomprehensible and indescribable, but I don't really want to carry on as someone will take the ****

vickypea - you're dead right its called "god of the gaps".

So you require faith to cling on to the concept of god in the face of all evidence. Fair enough if thats what you want to do i suppose.

Good on you pal. Religion has no place in schools other than RE.

molgrips - Member

Not at all! If God is real, [b]he[/b] must have a basis on which [b]He[/b] exists.

I spy with my little eye, something beginning with subliminal imposition of gender bias. The old story book that [i]men[/i] wrote states that the almighty is a man (and so is his son). Nuddie Calendar anyone? 😀

perchypanther - Member

It's Christmas. It's the story of the birth of Christ.

whats the birth of christ got to do with christmas????????

God is supposed to be incomprehensible and indescribable, but I don't really want to carry on as someone will take the ****

TBH when i studied theology this was what surprised me most . Even if one assumes god is true we still cannot explain the motives of said deity - its very hard to write sentences not saying a gender but I see i can still do it ! * 😉 .

It is a completely different mindset and we atheists just shrug about the stuff we dont know and then apply Occam's razor to the evidence

* I remember how hard it was to write sentence without saying a gender for gd - a real weakness in our language. I also remember losing marks for refusing to use a capital for god. Now its just laziness.

I remember how hard it was to write sentence without saying a gender for gd - a real weakness in our language. I also remember losing marks for refusing to use a capital for god.

Wow! You are the man! King of the Sixth form Common Room.

whats the birth of christ got to do with christmas????????

A lot. The people who organised the Christian religion couldn't stop people celebrating the old pagan festivals as they were good fun, so hundreds of years ago they nicked and put their own slant on them.

Not even the most fundamental Christian thinks that the 25th December is the actual date that Jesus Christ was born.

It's a bit like the Queens birthday.

How this has ended up as a theology debate I don't know.

Basically, Ben may be right that some "guidelines" have been breached but has acted like a bellend for suggesting that it was an attempt "of conversion" and sneding his passive aggressive email.

How this has ended up as a theology debate I don't know.

Offspring's nativity show today, was very cute - though not keen on all these modern pop songs. But all nice and inclusive telling of the story.

But at the end there was "a few words from our local minister" who told everyone that the story was really true, God was really watching over us all and Jesus is with us every day, and then "let us pray".

Pretty uncomfortable for us atheists - I assume pretty uncomfortable for the Muslim and Hindu kids and parents too.

Have fired off a email to the school reminding them of their obligations under guidelines regarding worship. Over-reaction or reasonable?

Here is the first post

Thankfully my awesome 6th form level* of debating skills and knowledge of STW have enabled me to work it out even if your are lost in confusion.

* how very dare you it was University 😉

Anyone here able to answer if god is 'in-time' or 'outside-time'?... 😀

A lot. The people who organised the Christian religion couldn't stop people celebrating the old pagan festivals as they were good fun, so hundreds of years ago they nicked and put their own slant on them.

Not even the most fundamental Christian thinks that the 25th December is the actual date that Jesus Christ was born

someone missed the subtle sarcasm in my post 🙁

I get the impression that religious observance is a bit more formal and explicit in England and Wales. Scottish schools (excluding RC schools) are generally pretty secular, and tend to address religion educationally, rather than practising it, so I can understand where Ben is coming from. Our local Minister often tries to shoehorn rather heavy handed Christian observance into the school activities he is involved in.

My son has been asked to speak a line at the primary school Christmas service next week. As an atheist I don't subscribe to the references about remembering God and Jesus, but it's an opportunity to talk about this stuff with him. In the long term, I think the best way to inoculate him against God Bothering is controlled exposure and open discussion!

OP. You did the right thing. Well done. It is an issue. Years of religious hegemony has given some people a sense of spiritual and moral entitlement. One inoffensive email to make those in charge question their assumptions and practice was entirely justified. Any more than that would be pointless and petty.

Basically, Ben may be right that some "guidelines" have been breached but has acted like a bellend for suggesting that it was an attempt "of conversion" and sneding his passive aggressive email.

How do you know it was passive-aggressive? Or do you think any email that you disagree with is passive-aggressive?

I like the way you've put "guidelines" in quotes, though - that makes them sound less important in a Daily Mail way. Do you think guidelines on what is taught in schools are unimportant?

Ok. Fair point.

I will change what I wrote.

Basically, Ben has acted like a WG bellend for stating that it was a breach of guidelines as it was an attempt "of conversion".

I like the way you've put "guidelines" in quotes, though - that makes them sound less important in a Daily Mail way. Do you think guidelines on what is taught in schools are unimportant?

Well it's guidelines written by GCC so make of that as you will 😉

My opinion - over reaction. 'Let us pray' is a request, not a command and I sincerely don't believe a sermon and prayer is really an attempt to convert anyone. At the end of the day it's your job as a parent to equip your children with the tools they need to form their own opinions and if you feel threatened by the above then perhaps you need to reassess how you are going about this.

Religion was never rammed down my throat (in fact our chaplain was also the philosophy teacher and always encouraged us to come to our own conclusions) so I'm a lot less hostile towards it than others, the same seems true for most folk I know (and vice versa) that the less it has been imposed the more accepting they are of it later in life.

Pretty uncomfortable for us atheists - I assume pretty uncomfortable for the Muslim and Hindu kids and parents too.

I am also an atheist, however you need to develop a tolerance of religion. I would like to see preachers of various religions, atheists and humanists talk in environments outside pf places of worship. How do we expect to develop an understanding of faiths if we don't get a feel for their beliefs?

Why should Hindu and Muslim parents feel awkward. Have they displayed their concern to you? To me at heart most mainstream religions have more in common than differences. I am sure following a ministers comments, everyone could use the time for reflection in their own way without fear of brainwashing.

You needn't worry bencooper, I don't think a suceptibility to brainwashing is hereditary! 😉

Complete over reaction. Whatever happens at school the biggest influence on a child is the home. All you have done is probably ruined the head's Christmas and possibly yours. You are obviously worried about what you have done, and all for what you got upset because at the end of a nativity play a minister said some prays. I assume you don't celebrate Christmas at home. Send the head an apology as soon as possible.

All you have done is probably ruined the head's Christmas and possibly yours.

Edit; Oh, and if you're going to express YOUR opinion, why not at least have the courtesy to read the blimmin' thread. The prerogative for atheists/agnostics to celebrate 'Christmas' has been roundly covered already.

I would like to see preachers of various religions, atheists and humanists talk in environments outside pf places of worship. How do we expect to develop an understanding of faiths if we don't get a feel for their belief

do you think was well served by someone making a mixed group join then in a prayer?

'Let us pray' is a request, not a command

Send the head an apology as soon as possible and ask for forgiveness 😉
FTFY

bencooper was obviously in the right to expect a school to recognise that not all the audience are god fans. However, observe across the pond what happens when religion is banned from schools - it attains the glamour of a forbidden fruit and large numbers of folk over-indulge. The good thing about "RE" as taught here is that kids quickly find out that it's a load of boring old bollox Think of it like an innoculation.

EDIT - kcr said the same thing already

Teaching RE in schools is very important. Holding worship in schools is not.

Complete over reaction ... probably ruined the head's Christmas and possibly yours ... obviously worried about what you have done ... you got upset... Send the head an apology as soon as possible.

What was that about a complete over-reaction? Sending one polite email isn't getting upset, it's not ruining everyone's Christmas.

It's funny how some people have got about this. Insults, wildly overblown hyperbole, some people are really, really defensive about this subject. I wonder why?

Atheists and Christmas, only curious thing is why they call it Christmas; and not the winter break like some US companies

Historical accident - much like why Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on a day when he wasn't born.

Atheists and Christmas, only curious thing is why they call it Christmas; and not the winter break like some US companies

I get the impression that religious observance is a bit more formal and explicit in England and Wales. Scottish schools (excluding RC schools) are generally pretty secular, and tend to address religion educationally, rather than practising it, so I can understand where Ben is coming from.

some people are really, really defensive about this subject. I wonder why?

It's not the subject that has annoyed me.

It's the "offended" stance and the quoting of guidelines.

You went to a celebration of the Christmas story and got offended when somebody brought religion into it. Then sent an email to complain, suggesting that someone was trying to convert your children.

If the priest/minster/vicar handn't said "Let us pray", I'm sure you would of found something to else be offended about.

You seem really pleased that it happened, to the point of on your return home, you looked up the formal guidelines on line and quoted them.

It's pathetic.

It's the "offended" stance and the quoting of guidelines.

I'm not offended, I've repeatedly said I'm not offended. You, however, seem to be. I wonder why?

Again with the guidelines - what other school teaching guidelines do you think are unimportant?

I'm sure you would of found something to else be offended about. You seem really pleased that it happened

Nope, the rest of it was lovely, as I said. You seem desperate to paint me as some kind of radical atheist, again I'm wondering why?

Right to be peeved?

But at the end there was "a few words from our local minister" who told everyone that the story was really true, God was really watching over us all and Jesus is with us every day, and then "let us pray".

Pretty uncomfortable for us atheists - I assume pretty uncomfortable for the Muslim and Hindu kids and parents too.

Why were you peeved? Why did it make you feel uncomfortable?

You attended a Christian clelbration in your local community and "reported" a local clergyman from that community for attempting to convert you and your family.

offended

1. To cause displeasure, anger, resentment, or wounded feelings in: We were offended by his tasteless jokes.
2. To be displeasing or disagreeable to: Onions offend my sense of smell.
v.intr.
1. To result in displeasure: Bad manners may offend.
2.
a. To violate a moral or divine law; sin.
b. To violate a rule or law: offended against the curfew.

Thesaurus
offended
adjective upset, pained, hurt, bothered, disturbed, distressed, outraged, stung, put out (informal), grieved, disgruntled, agitated, ruffled, resentful, affronted, miffed (informal), displeased, in a huff, piqued, huffy

it's an instruction rather than asking if you want to join him in prayer

Well since neither one of us was there neither could really say for sure by context I suppose.

However, from my experiences of various CoS ministers the run up is usually an invitation followed by 'let us pray' as a signal that the prayer is beginning.

I think gobuchul's got you on this one, bencooper- to me, peeved and offended are virtually synonymous, and as the title of your thread is "right to be peeved".....

I suppose it's a language thing then - to me, to be offended is a much more emotional thing than just being a bit peeved. Just because words are listed in a thesaurus doesn't make them exactly equal.

For example, if I was the kind of person who got offended easily, I'd be offended at being called a bawbag. Not peeved.

Things can be annoying without being offensive.
Offended carries a particular connotation of moral indignation.
Words adjacent to each other in a thesaurus are not synonyms.

Yeah, I know that. Ok, better question bc, and one you've not really been asked/not talked about.....

....just why are you bothered?

Serious question. I would just have let it go.