Would you say something to the RE teacher about this comment?

Sorry chick - I retrained in computer science, got seduced by all that lovely technology that was coming into schools in the early 80's and wanted to play with robots Haven't taught RE for 30 yrs - I can proudly say that I was THAT nightmare parent at parent's evening though, demanding to know which RE syllabus they were using and what the qualification of the RE staff were.

I do think we avoided the rather bonkers extreme end of religion that the US deals with by having RE in schools where there is some opportunity to debate and discuss. In the US they "only" have science classes not RE - so the bonkers creationists are able to offer it as an alternative theory, not a different way of thinking completely this is a very scary map.

"Religious Education" is about teaching kids about religions, about what people all over the world believe, enabling them to have the critical tools and knowledge to make up their own minds. It's not "Religious Indoctrination", in which the teacher tells children that what religions say Is True and that science is just a theory. That is a very important difference.

I would definitely say something. The RE teacher should be couching things like that as "some people believe X" rather than as a statement of fact.

I'm a committed Christian (DH is training to be a vicar) and I would say something. I'd be concerned that the RE teacher doesn't have a particularly good grasp of her own subject, never mind science.

I'd say something. Kids don't need to be fed bullshit.

How do you know what was said?

If only she had a better teacher.

I am a bit fatalistic about this. Sometimes they end up with a teacher who is not so good, that's life. Fortunately, in secondary they don't have to spend all their time with them.

Yes, I would say the explanation is that the creation story didn't actually take place in 7 actual days, but over 7 millenia, so God created Man and all the surrounding creatures and the universe through evolution. I don't actually believe this, but it's quite easy to explain, and was actually what I was taught at Catholic school 25 years ago. It disappoints me that we seem to have gone back in time to a time when religious dogma is seen as untouchable, whereas science is seen as 'another theory'. They are not equal. One has to be proven and the other is a belief that needs no proof.

There are two points here:

1. God switching on the light, or not. You can argue that forever depending on religious / scientific viewpoint
2. "Excuse me miss, but the moon isn't lit, it's lit up by the sun." Spot on DC. The moon does not emit light, it only reflects it. The teacher is wrong here.

If it was an otherwise good RE teacher it might have been said in a joking way - but it didn't come off. If the RE teacher is in any way anti science then they are not a good RE teacher. Religion and Science are not opposed, I am a scientist (PhD) who used to also be an RE teacher. Good RE, as it should be taught in the UK, never opposes good science education.

I used to tell my students that Religion is about looking for meaning and is trying to answer the "why?" questions in life - the questions people have asked for thousands of years, "why are there people and animals?" "why are there women and men?" "why is there good and evil?" "why do bad things happen to good people?". Early civilisations wrote stories to try to explain why these things happened and that's the legacy of religious texts we have. If we look at the texts as an attempt by early people to make sense of their world then they become much more interesting IMO.

Science is not interested in meaning in the same way - Science is looking to explain How things happen, e.g. "what is the mechanism behind the fact we have diverse species of animals?" and comes up with theories to explain this. The best theory we have to explain this diversity is the theory of evolution. Psychology, as a science, asks what are the mechanisms involved in people becoming "evil" or deviant. Neither psychology not biology concern themselves much with "what does this mean for us as human beings?".

You can be a fabulous RE teacher and not believe in god, you can be a Nobel prize winning scientist and believe in god. There is nothing mutually exclusive.

Your DH is right to be furious. I wouldn't bother saying anything to the teacher, who is clearly a nutter misinformed.

I would talk to my child about why the teacher is wrong about that, how science and religion are not in opposition, plenty of scientists are religious, that you can understand how the sun, moon and stars are lit and also have religious beliefs, etc.

That God created man, albeit through using evolution. (One explanation amongst many)

Chica, I would clarify before even bringing things up at a parent's evening:

• What exactly was said by kid and teacher
• What the intention was in saying it

Maybe the teacher wanted to create a debate. I can't believe anyone believes the sun doesn't light up the moon. It's not even like evolution where there are lots of theories going on. It's more like the world being flat.

Ubik1 not quite that much of a simple explanation . What do you mean?

Bowlersarm -Well I suppose it depends on your conception of God.

But how does a scientist, who is also religious and believes in God, explain the creation of man?

(Simple explanation please!)

if the teacher is teaching something you dont agree with, then its up to you to tell your children what you believe.

so i would have said... yes the teacher and lots of people think that , but we believe and it has been proved by science that.....

i dont believe that getting all furious about it helps in any way at all

My friends 6 year old said that the christians were rubbish for not allowing galelio (sp) to look through his telescope!

i got all angry at the school telling my dd that there isnt a father christmas (in a book) she was 5. when i bounded up to the school to complain, they said... but he isnt real, and you are lying to your dd, how will she feel when she knows you have lied to her.

I told her that some people, who dont believe in the magic of christmas, dont believe in FC. that covered it for a few years, but this year i came clean and told her that there wasnt a fc exactly, but the magic of christmas is that parents all over the world, all do something for no thanks at all, because fc gets all the thanks. isnt that wonderful?

No I wouldn't say anything; it would make you sound pedantic.

The most evangelical, religious person I know is a scientist.

He would give you his explanation and it would take a couple of hours.

Very odd comment and I would definitely say something. BTW my DC attend a catholic secondary and have never had anything like that said to them.

I don't think science and RE have to be opposed. RE should be about exploring what different people believe, how this leads them to behave and to encourage questioning thought about belief, morality and society. It should not be about putting forward any one set of beliefs as a single truth. Science is about demonstrable fact, that does not mean you cannot believe in something you cannot prove to be true or untrue. So it would be fine to say "some people believe that god created the sun, moon and stars and switched them on like lights", but not at all fine to deny scientific fact that the moon is lit by reflected light.

It's important to..you know...stick to the facts when you are teaching children. Good for that child in speaking up. And it's orbits the sun not vice versa. Ask Galileo he was tortured for these theories

I do wonder whether the teacher was serious or whether they were just trying to get into some sort of christian mindset...or something...