i agree tat its diff nowadays…most of the punishments mentioned happened more than 10yrs ago n the teachers belonged to older generation where punishments were seen as the way to teach n guide students…its diff nowadays where teachers use the soft approach…however, how useful is the soft approach??? sad to say, i dun tink its very useful as students nowadays have become more rebellious…

those looking for logical reasoning/concrete proof for the existence of God…u can look up www.peterkreeft.com...thanks

hi yamizi…well, to answer ur qn…actually i alredi mentioned in a tat same post tat we were in sec 2 then. so tat would make him 14 yrs old??? it was a very degrading punishment which was y many felt the teacher went overboard…yet u must understand the teacher in tis case was very sensitive abt vulgarities…she hated students to use vulgarities n plus the class was quite noisy when she came in tat time…so the accumulation of all these may have caused her to react so strongly…

its nt tat i had a very negative schooling experience…its juz tat i have a gd memory of my schooling days…hence i am able to recall many punishment cases tat happened both to me n my fellow peers…tat was y i set up tis thread in the 1st place…no pt starting a thread if i had little to tok or share abt…

another interesting punishment my tutor shared wif us happened in school when she punished a student from another class for being rude. it was during a chinese lesson. my tutor was conducting a class one morning when she was interrupted by a student from another class. apparently, tis student had come to her class to make a request for a student to go n see his teacher…wad angered my tutor was tat tis student jus walked up to the doorway n requested verbally for tat student, interrupting my tutor in the process. at tat time, she was in the midst of explaining certain things n tat interruption broke her train of tots…

my tutor summoned the student in angrily n scolded him for being rude. she asked him y he didnt knock on the door to get her attention 1st b4 making his request. after some scolding, she allowed the student from her class to go n see the teacher while ordering the errant student to stay behind. then, as a punishment for being rude, she ordered him to stand at the doorway n keep knocking on the door continuously. in the end, the errant student was made to keep knocking on the door until my tutor released him. my tutor could nt recall how long he was punished but she knew it was long enuff to make the student show slight signs of tiredness. she let him go wif a stern warning tat if he repeated his offence again in future, she would make him knock on the staff room door for an hr after school…

the main reason y my reasoning must begin wif the other person 1st believing theres a God is cos i am nt scientifically inclined…hence, i cun provide gd enuff reasoning to refute evolution. i do noe of ppl who can though. all i can say is tat evolution does nt operate on the law of cause n effect n it cannot explain the original existence of emotions n laws. in fact, from wad i noe, evolution violates science in certain ways…tats juz abt wad i noe abt evolution n y i cannot stand…i have lots more to say abt creation of cuz, but it may be ineffective for u cos u do not start of by believing theres a God…

theres a high chance u wil render wad i say as ineffective…tis may occur on 2 grounds…1) most of my logical reasoning starts off wif the person believing theres a God/creator…but dunno which one to believe in…2) like i said earlier, wad may seem logical to me may nt be logical to u…

u may have heard tis b4 but i am stil going to say it…thru my 10yrs as a christian, i have nt met anyone who became a christian thru logically understanding the existence of God n why the christian God is the rite one. in fact, i have met ppl who got more confused abt God when they tried to search for logical reasonings to explain His existence. u may nt like tis but when it comes to believing in any god, faith must play a part…in fact, to believe in sth often involves faith…knowledgeable christians i have met usually became christian without much logical reasoning n then became very knowledgeable after they converted. the interesting thing is as they grew in knowledge, they didnt get more confused. tis is unlike those who sought for logical reasoning b4 becoming christian. of cuz u can choose to disagree wif tis, but tats wad i have observed in these past 10yrs…

one more thing u must note, gohby…whoever u discuss tis issue wif made provide u wif logical reasons for the existence of God but note tat wads logical to them may nt be logical to u…i tink u have to be clear tat diff ppl r convinced in diff ways thru diff set of reasoning…likewise, i can share the logical reasons y i believe in God wif u but u may nt find them logical…

one final tot, if u tink tat a proper logical reason has to be one tat u cun refute then i am sorry to say tat such reasoning doesnt exist…cos we r imperfect human beings n theres no way we can produce an argument tat is 100% flawless…

gohby…i do have reasonable arguments abt God but u must 1st be able to meet me at a common ground 1st…the reason y i keep asking u for definitions is cos many misunderstandings n disagreements arise due to differences in definitions. unless we can come to a consensus abt the definition of God, the discussion cun start…besides if u r gonna start of wif a 50-50 stand on God n atheism, then i am very sorry, i cun help u much cos most of my reasonable arguments start off wif the person believing tat theres a God…maybe u would like to go to www.peterkreeft.com n listen to The Argument for a 1st cause…cheers!!!

then perhaps u may wanna share y u tink its nt the christian God n which god do u tink it is if there is indeed a God…

there is a need to discuss which God is the rite one…i said tat in my previous post…but b4 we do tat, u must 1st be make a stand if God exist…then i need to ask u how do u define God? does God means creator or wad???

oh yes…one more thing gohby…b4 we even discuss which God is the so-called “rite” God…u must 1st make a stand whether u believe tat a creator exists…cos if u do not believe in the existence of God then theres no need to discuss which God is the “rite” one…

x2…well said…theres no such thing as concrete proof…

so from the above, its reasonability tat we shld be discussing abt n nt concrete proof…i once spoke to a pst abt tis issue…he shared wif me tat its all abt reasonability…while he stood there toking to me, he cannot prove to me at tat time tat if he went hm, he wun find his wife sleeping wif another man. all he can do is to tell me tat based on his r/s wif his wife, its very reasonable for him to believe n tell me tat his wife will nt be found sleeping wif another man when he returned hm…

even when u say tat there r overwhelming evidence to prove certain things exist…has it ever occurred to u tat these evidence could be all wrong??? ah, nw it seems rather impossible for all the evidence to be wrong. after all, we r toking abt plenty of evidences tat comes from many sources n span over centuries. but can we EVER rule out the possibility tat all evidences could be wrong? can we be 100% certain tat the evidence r correct? u see, concrete proofs points to 100% accuracy…can u guarantee tat none of the evidence or even wad u can see is 100% true n accurate? if u can see my pt, then u will noe tat its nt abt concrete proof we shld be discussing abt but rather its abt reasonability…

ok…i tink i need to elaborate wad i realli mean when i say reasonability n concrete proof…by tis i give u tis scenario…

assuming i have nvr crossed a road b4, nw i am standing at the pavement wif u…i ask u: prove to me tat if i cross the road when the green man comes on n all the vehicles stop tat i wun get knocked down by any of them. nw how r u going to prove to me? if u r juz going to cross the road urself n when u get to the other end, tell me: see? i have crossed the road, so i have proven to u. my reply wil be: sorry…u have onli proven to me tat YOU wun get knocked down if YOU cross the road…BUT u havent proven tat I wun get knocked down if I crossed the road…the onli way i can prove to myself is by crossing the road myself n see if i get knocked down…likewise, for the existence of God, how to prove to u unless u experience Him urself???

when i say tat u cun prove ur own existence, wad i meant was u cun prove ur existence to others. theres a philosophy tat argues tat even though we see ourselves, we could stil be a figment of our own imagination. nw tis sounds absurd of cuz…but notice absurd it may be, the ppl ard can choose to deny seeing u at all, then wad r u gonna say? r u gonna say they r mad??? well maybe, but notice u can prove to urself tat u exist but u cun prove to others tat u exist. of cuz most if nt all ppl will nt deny ur existence. but they do so cos its reasonable for them to trust tat since they can see u, hence u exist…likewise some ppl, thru personal encounters wif God has proven to themselves tat He exists but they cun prove tat to u since u do not have such encounters…anyway, if u stil dun get wad i mean, feel free to discuss further…

thanks for replying gohby…actually, i feel tat the type of “concrete proof” u r toking abt is more abt reasonability. some ppl will argue tat nth on earth can ever be concretely proven n tat includes even ur own existence. hence, the qn u shld ask is: is it more reasonable to believe in a creator who created the whole universe or is it more reasonable to believe tat the whole universe existed by chance? by chance usually implies sth to do wif evolution..

i can see u r someone who onli believe the things u see. seeing is believing to u although like i said earlier, there r some who wil argue tat juz cos u see sth does nt mean it realli exist. many things in life r “proven” to us thru personal experiences. while u have seen certain things in life, i may nt have seen the same things as u. so do i conclude tat those things u have seen dun exist? since its down to personal experiences, i can onli tell u tat nobody on earth can “prove” to u tat God exist since ppl who believe in Him believe either thru faith or thru personal encounters. the truth of the matter is u cun verify such encounters as they r meant to be personal, onli for tat person himself/herself. so juz cos we cun verify them, do we say those ppl r bluffing? wad “proof” do we have tat they r bluffing?

its a pity u didnt live 2000yrs ago or u would have seen jesus himself. then u wouldnt be asking for “concrete proofs” for God’s existence. in fact, no one can ever see God the Father. we can onli see God the Son at the very most. His next visit to earth will be at the 2nd coming. anyway, do tink thru wad i have said n if u have anymore qns, feel free to ask them here. i will try my best to answer them…cheers!!!

so simple?? tats being too nice to him leh…wif magic, she can do much more than tat, i believe…

ok…as promised, here is one of the interesting punishment tat my tutor told us abt…according to her, tis punishment was onli meted out once b4 to a pri 5 student she tutored several yrs b4 she tutored us…it was a very shameful n humiliating punishment n she onli meted it cos the student repeatedly refused to study his spelling or his work…

according to our tutor, she made it a pt to inform the boy’s parents abt his laziness b4 punishing him…the boy’s parents gave her the authority to punish him over the fone…the lesson was held at our tutor’s hse n there were 3 other students there…our tutor sternly ordered tat student to stand at a corner while she went to get sth…soon, she emerged wif a blouse n a short skirt…she then beckoned the student to the kitchen. moments later, the student was crying n pleading wif her in the kitchen. apparently, our tutor had ordered him to remove his clothes n put on the blouse n skirt. she also colored his lips wif lipstick n ordered him to go n stand in the middle of the living room, face the other 3 students n pull his ears. the student, of cuz didnt dare to leave the kitchen but our tutor was adamant n despite his pleas, made him do wad she had ordered him to do. needless to say, the other 3 students could not contain their laughter when they saw him…it was onli when our tutor sternly warned them not to laugh or they too wil be punished tat they stopped laughing…

i stil rem tat when we heard tis account from our tutor, we didnt noe whether to laugh or to cry. we could imagine how humiliating n ashamed the boy would have felt. according to our tutor, he juz stood there pulling his ears, dressed like a gal n crying thru out. his head was lowered n it was obvious he felt very embarrassed. the gd thing for him was our tutor didnt punish him for the whole lesson. she let him off after abt 20min. we then asked her how the parents felt abt wad she did n she told us tat the parents didnt blame her cos they also felt tat their son needed to be tot a lesson. well all i can say is, its without a doubt tat the boy was tot a very gd lesson. he did become a better student after tat…

the motive of tis thread is to seel the definition of concrete proof from those who ask for concrete proof for God’s existence…wad do u mean by concrete?

is there or is there not? i guess its impt to 1st define wad we mean by concrete proof…would like to hear from the forumers here 1st b4 i give my comments…

hey guys, juz for fun…guess how she might use magic to punish her bf for cheating on her???

u dun find them convincing doesnt mean they r not convincing wad…anyway, to atheists like u who go round blaspheming religions, i have nth to say to u…go n be ur own god…cheers!!!

so juz cos God is one who forgives, we shld keep on defying HIm again n again??? Is tis how we treat a God whom we love? do u keep on defying the One u love n making Him unhappy? maybe u will/do, but not the true followers of God…

y dun u kill someone and then ask the law to pardon u???

then should we defy the One who gave us our parents or dun offer joss sticks in obedience to Him???

haha…i see an irony here…someone is telling me nt to take verses in the bible literally but yet he/she is guilty of doing the same…having said tis, i have alredi said wad i wanted to say in tis thread…unless sth constructive tat needs to be address comes along…i will nt comment anymore cos i dun see the need to debate wif ppl who refuse to check the context of verses but juz quote them freely to refute other verses…cheers