Siamang, you said:

But MATH wasn’t created by God. Math is a HUMAN invention, meant to describe the universe which may or may not have been created by God.

The representation – the language – of mathematics is a human invention, but is mathematics itself? Think of the examples of mathematical concepts occurring in nature, for example the Fibonacci sequence, the golden ratio, pi…how can you say that mathematics is a human invention?? Mathematical realism is the view that mathematics is a natural phenomenon, & we are simply discovering and describing it.

Mathematical realism, like realism in general, holds that mathematical entities exist independently of the human mind. Thus humans do not invent mathematics, but rather discover it, and any other intelligent beings in the universe would presumably do the same. In this point of view, there is really one sort of mathematics that can be discovered: Triangles, for example, are real entities, not the creations of the human mind.

Many working mathematicians have been mathematical realists; they see themselves as discoverers of naturally occurring objects. Examples include Paul Erd?s and Kurt Gödel. Gödel believed in an objective mathematical reality that could be perceived in a manner analogous to sense perception.

That page goes on to describe several models of mathematical realism, including Platonism. Not one of them is called Human Hubris.

You seem to view math as (as the page linked above calls it) and “embodied mind theory”:

Embodied mind theories hold that mathematical thought is a natural outgrowth of the human cognitive apparatus which finds itself in our physical universe. For example, the abstract concept of number springs from the experience of counting discrete objects. It is held that mathematics is not universal and does not exist in any real sense, other than in human brains. Humans construct, but do not discover, mathematics.

With this view, the physical universe can thus be seen as the ultimate foundation of mathematics: it guided the evolution of the brain and later determined which questions this brain would find worthy of investigation. However, the human mind has no special claim on reality or approaches to it built out of math. If such constructs as Euler’s identity are true then they are true as a map of the human mind and cognition.

Embodied mind theorists thus explain the effectiveness of mathematics — mathematics was constructed by the brain in order to be effective in this universe.

Math has been described as the study of patterns. We see patterns all around us, even when they’re not really there. Mathematics includes a way of formalizing the description & proofs of patterns that exist.

after all, it’s already been stated that for a christian, god affects/is part of everything, so please explain to me why any christian who feels this would wish to keep religion and politics seperate

I’ve heard it said that the purpose, for some Christians, would be to keep politics/the state from influencing (diluting? tainting? constraining?) their religion.

Yes. And unless the constitution is changed legitimately, I consider those things “unconstitutional” and should therefore be dealt with appropriately.

If it’s unconstitutional then appropriate measures should be taken.

you do realise constitutions can be undermined, subverted and even changed?

regarding the matter of ‘it’s a private school, they can do whatever’, is this a privilege purely extended to the religious, or could it also be applied to any agenda a private school wished to teach? can anyone else see an inherent danger here? would white supremism and holocaust denial as definitive history be ok if it was taught at a private school?

if one of these kids has enough of an education to get into politics but still believes faith should be part of everything and state/church lines should be blurred…

after all, it’s already been stated that for a christian, god affects/is part of everything, so please explain to me why any christian who feels this would wish to keep religion and politics seperate – especially a former pupil of a school like this, where mixing religious and secular subjects did no harm whatsoever/improved the subject?