Fired for saying Genesis isn't literal truth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Don't Need A Name

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Don't Need A Name

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laddy

Still, nobody did anything wrong until somebody's beliefs almost ruined somebody's career for their beliefs.

---

It was the teacher's beliefs that caused the trouble. He has the right to believe whatever he wants. However, stating that belief as fact is totally out of line. Should he have been fired? Probably not. Should he have been punished? Yes. He abused his authority.

---

he hardly abused his authority, he only pointed out that snakes infact cannot talk

---

That was by no means "all" he pointed out.

Quote:

---

I told them it was an extremely meaningful story, but you had to see it in a poetic, metaphoric or symbolic sense, that if you took it literally, that you were going to miss a whole lot of meaning there.

---

He has no right to tell anyone how they "have" to view their relegion. His opinion is that the story is full of depth, meaning, and metaphorical imagery. I don't even disagree with that. He overstepped his authority in using his position as a teacher to present that view as the only view. His class was western civilization, not interpretation of relegious dogma.

---

still, the kids have no right to get the teacher sacked for having a different view to him. just because he has a more logical view on the bible stories doesnt mean they can go about getting a man out of a job

---

Of course not. He has every right to his view. He still does not have the right to force that view on his class, and that is where he stepped out of line.

he never forced this view. it doesnt state anywhere where he said I AM CORRECT! BELIEVE ME OR I WILL BEAT YOU

He said it had no meaning unless viewed a particular way. Sorry, but that is presenting his view as the only valid one.

I dont get it, why would a book lie to me?

Maybe snakes didnt use to talk like humans, maybe humans use to talk like snakes and evolved out of it :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

The real question here is how did those students make it into college?

Edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skyblade

It was the teacher's beliefs that caused the trouble. He has the right to believe whatever he wants. However, stating that belief as fact is totally out of line. Should he have been fired? Probably not. Should he have been punished? Yes. He abused his authority.

---

But it is fact.

---

Um...since when? Last I remembered, all origins of existence were smurfing theories. Just because you're arrogant doesn't make you automatically right. When I say I believe in intelligent design, it doesn't make it automatically right. Aren't all existential beliefs based off of theories? Since when has there been solid, verifiable proof in any subject of the sort?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poetically Pathetic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

The real question here is how did those students make it into college?

Edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skyblade

It was the teacher's beliefs that caused the trouble. He has the right to believe whatever he wants. However, stating that belief as fact is totally out of line. Should he have been fired? Probably not. Should he have been punished? Yes. He abused his authority.

---

But it is fact.

---

Um...since when? Last I remembered, all origins of existence were smurfing theories. Just because you're arrogant doesn't make you automatically right. When I say I believe in intelligent design, it doesn't make it automatically right. Aren't all existential beliefs based off of theories? Since when has there been solid, verifiable proof in any subject of the sort?

---

I don't think nik0tine subscribes to theistic creationism stories, so I think when he says 'fact' he means '[the story] is factually [a theory]'. But I'm not sure he means that.

In any case, your response is correct -- we have no means to knowing anything, so it all boils down to belief. However some people are able to circumvent this fence-sitting conclusion by means of things like the flying teacup example of how we shouldn't just suspend belief just because there's no evidence. The conclusion however still doesn't change -- it's still belief and not 'knowledge'.

He did nothing in the wrong. He simply said that if you took Genesis literally than you will miss the greater picture and other things. There are many ways to look at texts, especially religious text. To say there is only one way to look at them (literal way for example) is foolish in the sense that you limit any possible understanding that can be derived from the text. Also, not all Christians take Genesis to be literal anyways, there are many who think it is metaphorical. In fact, one of my professors told my class once that if you actually look at the style of writing in Genesis (such as grammar and syntax) there is evidence to show that there were four different authors of Genesis. :/

He may have crossed the line by saying it was a "fairy tale" but the thing is, when he said it, it was after class to a single student. In such a personal scenario it is most likely he was only saying his personal view.

Anyways, it makes sense that the Bible would be used in a Western Civilization class seeing as how much it has impacted Western Civilization.

Also no theory of creation whether it be Creationism or Evolution are indeed facts, like said earlier they are merely theories. He did not even say Creationism was wrong, simply that the story of creation told in Genesis should not be taken so literally. After all, man was created twice in Genesis. First in chapter one (God creates man and woman in his image) then in chapter two with the story of Adam and Eve.