11Tu1

For information on past papers look here.

There are also some “Examiners Reports” on that page, which work through some past papers and explain the kinds of things examiners are looking for.

Today we considered the big bang theory of the development of the universe. Using modelling clay we saw how all the material in the universe exploded outwards and then cooled down and came together over time. We thought about how the Doppler Effect (eg. the change in sound when a police car goes past) shows that the stars are moving away from each other.

Intelligent design theorists say that the fact that there is something rather than nothing suggests that there is an intelligent designer putting everything together. Also, the force of gravity is very precise - any stronger and the universe would collapse, any weaker and the universe would expand forever without ever forming planets.

We looked at evolution today, and how it is a combination of random mutations and natural selection. We also looked briefly at intelligent design and its arguments against evolution.

Notebook presentation

We looked at a video of Richard Dawkins, which help explain the intelligent design idea of “irreducible complexity”:

For a fun version of evolution in reverse:

Today we started some revision on science and religion, looking at the relationship between the two. We explored three different ways to understand the relationship: conflict, independence and dialogue:

Conflict:

This model of the relationship between science and religion assumes that there is a battle going on. Science and religion both make claims about the nature of the world and only one can be right. They are both fighting over the same ground and eventually one will be victorious and other will die out.
Scientists who support this model say that modern science can explain everything to do with the world and its origins and so religion is no longer required. For them, religion is a set of fairy-tales once used to explain certain things but now science can do that and so the fairy-tales can be abandoned. They don’t necessarily think religious people are bad, but they think that they are deluded and aren’t looking at the facts seriously.

Christians who support this model say that modern science has it all wrong. They would prefer to trust the version of events given by God over the human efforts of scientists. If the Bible says the earth was created in 6 days about 4,000 years ago then it must be so. They often dispute scientific theories, particularly evolution by natural selection, and may say that things like this are a test of faith. They believe that perhaps one day they might be proven right, but in the mean time it is their job to uphold their religious truth and show that science isn’t as reliable as it claims to be.

Dialogue:

People accepting the dialogue model argue that all knowledge is part of a whole. You cannot separate science from religion from philosophy from art. To get a full view of reality you need to look at it from every angle and so scientists can learn from religious people and religious people can learn from science. Both ask different kinds of questions of the world and so co-exist peacefully, but it is still important that science and religion learn from each other.

Scientists who go for this model follow their science but accept that religious ideas might make a difference to what they do. For example, some scientists might know that they could potentially clone a human being, but would listen to what religious people say about the relationship between humans and God before doing it. Religious ethics can be used to make scientific decisions.

Similarly, Christians who accept this model accept that science can shed light on their own problems. When scientists say that humanity developed through a process of evolution they might go back to the Bible and re-consider what they think it is saying. Scientific ideas can be used to provoke thinking about the Bible and what it might be saying about humanity.

Independence:

Many people hold that religion and science are two completely different fields of study. Just as you wouldn’t say that English is right and Maths is wrong it is silly to argue that science is right and religion is wrong. Such people say that science asks quite different kinds of questions to religion and they can both ask these questions without coming into conflict with each other.

Scientists who hold this model would acknowledge that they ask questions about the natural laws of the universe. They can ask about how gravity works or how species develop. However, they accept that some questions are beyond the boundaries of science, such as “Why does the universe exist?” and “What is the meaning of life?”. This they are happy to leave to religion and philosophy.

Christians who accept this version of events think similar things to scientists. When they read the creation stories in the Bible they accept that it is not a science book and so don’t think it right to ask scientific questions of it. They say that the Bible tells them about the relationship between human beings and God, not about how the planets came to be formed.
While both sides accept that the other is real and good, people working on this model don’t think that science and religion have much to say to each other. A scientist won’t learn much about science by talking to a religious person, nor will a religious person learn about religion in a science class.

You summarised this information into bullet points, drew out some pros and cons, and then made models to represent the information. Your work is here:

• Conflict
• Independence
• Dialogue

Christians are concerned not only about what they do with their money, but also where they get their money from. As such there are certain jobs that Christians are unlikely to take.

Some extreme examples might be:

• Drug dealing - because it is illegal and hurts the users and those involved in the supply chain
• Prostitution - because it is abusive and treats the body like an object rather than a “temple of the Holy Spirit” that is made in the image of God (imago Dei) so is dishonouring to God.

Other more everyday examples might be:

• Work in abortion clinics
• Work involving gambling
• Jobs in companies that employ slave or child labour
• Certain kinds of medical research

Remember that while these might be important issues for some Christians they won’t necessarily be for others. For example, while many Christians are against abortion, some may not be and would look to be a positive influence in abortion clinics.

Today we reviewed some of the responses to last lesson’s exam question. Here’s an answer to part B:

Explain why Christians are concerned about the poor:
Christians are concerned about the poor because God is concerned about the poor. In the Bible it says that humans should help the needy and protect the weak; they shouldn’t be greedy and should share with those who need it. Christians feel they should protect the rights of helpless people, such as the homeless and hungry and they should feed and house them also.
Christians are concerned about the poor because if they help the needy they will be rewarded by God - helping these people will get them closer to God.

This made lots of use of words like “because” and “therefore. Like the key word in the question it has explained why Christians are concerned about the poor.

Another answer was this one:

Explain why Christians are concerned about the poor

Christian are concerned about the poor because Jesus made himself poor for the sake of others, so they believe that if God and Jesus helped the poor followers of the Bible and God would help the poor as well.

When you lend to the poor, you are lending to God, God will pay you back. Christians believe that if they help do God’s job to help the poor God will repay them with help and care.

Jesus gave up all he had, his free will, to help the poor because he cared that much and believed they were important as the rich. If you help others you’re helping God to do his work and help the poor live. Kindness is an act of worship, because God wanted everyone to be kind to each other and help each other and God took this as following him and worshipping him.

I particularly liked the last bit of this one about giving to the poor being an act of worship. This makes clear the link between the teaching and the action that happens in response.

We also looked at a part C answer:

A rich Christian is a contradiction in terms. Do you agree?

Some would agree that a rich Christian is a contradiction because the Bible teaches that you should share your wealth among the poor. If a Christian shared their wealth out equally with the poor they would not be wealthy as they wouldn’t have that money.

On the other hand, others would say that it is not a contradiction because some Christians need wealth in order to give it to the poor. Also, they could argue that the person has worked hard in order to gain that wealth.

This has given two possible points of view. Note that when the question asks “Do you agree?” it is not simply asking what you think. You need to say what you think with reference to the teachings. If you give two points of view, you can then conclude by saying that: “I think… is right because…”, then you explain why you think one point of view is more convincing than the other.

Finally we tried another exam question. For every mark you scored you would get one entry into a raffle, so the more marks you get the better chance of winning a prize! We’ll hold the raffle on Tuesday after half term…

• Part A: Describe Christian teaching on poverty (8 marks)
• Part B: Explain why poverty is so difficult to escape from (7 marks)
• Part C: “God has a preference for the poor”. Discuss with reference to Christianity (5 marks)

If you have any questions then leave a comment and I’ll respond.

Today we continued on from last week looking at Christian attitudes to poverty.

The main part of the lesson involved looking briefly at Part C exam questions and did some practise at Part B and C:

Part B: Explain why Christians are concerned about the poor. (7 marks)

Part C: “Yes, I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God” (Jesus). The idea of a rich Christian is a contradiction in terms. Do you agree?

If, for any reason you did not hand in your response at the end of the lesson I expect to see it on Thursday morning.

For both part B and part C refer back to the information looked at last week (February 3rd lesson).

For part C in particular make sure you give a balanced argument. It is no good just saying “I think this…” - the examiner couldn’t care less what you think unless you explain why you think it.

Here are the criteria:

• Level 1 (1-2 marks): A statement of the obvious, a one sided judgement with little or no argument.
• Level 2 (3 marks): An expression of one opinion directly related to the issue raised with an argument offered in support of it or a simple expression of two points of view.
• Level 3 (4 marks): The ability to recognise some of the significance of the issue raised. The expression of opinions directly related to it supported with some use of evidence and argument.
• Level 4 (5 marks): The ability to recognise some of the significance of the issue(s) raised and to express valid opinions about different points of view supported by evidence and argument.

To get more than 3 out of 5 marks you have to “use evidence and argument”. That involves explaining why your opinion is better than someone else’s.

We’ll look at this a little more on Thursday.

Today we were going to learn more about poverty, but it was a snow day…

Hopefully you all learned about making snowmen instead. This is what I made:

6 different groups each had a different aspect of the Christian approach to poverty to look at through verses from the Bible. The work produced is here (large files):

• God’s concern for the poor
• God’s commands concerning the poor
• Blessings on those who serve the poor
• Consequences of not serving the poor
• Biblical attitudes for believers towards the poor
• God’s identification with the poor

We played a game simulating the world trading markets. Some teams were rich countries, others were poor. The countries experienced the frustration of not having the resources and tools to properly develop themselves…