Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Courier-Journal

FRANKFORT, Ky. - The state would create rules for teaching about the Bible in public high schools under a bill filed Monday by three Democratic senators.

Comments (Page 4,603)

Showing posts 92,041 - 92,060 of128,056
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96310
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

what wrote:
<quoted text>
the catholics burned all the literature. the church survives is about all churches becuz if u would read your bible then u would find out that god requires u to give 10% so obviously u are invaluable to this discussion cuz u are arguin from ignorance. go read the bible and maybe u will learn that it is garbage.
Might want to cleanse yourself of the mires of ignorance in your own hate filled eyes.

It is blaringly obvious, you are abjectly clueless to any REAL aspects of truth of reality.

Start READING for YOURSELF-
THE VATICAN LIBRARY

The manuscripts and printed books that came to rest in the Vatican Library tell many stories. They help to explain the development of Renaissance thought and art, scholarship and science, in Rome and elsewhere. They shed light on the history of the universal Roman church and on the city in which it flourished, on the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation--even on the history of Western efforts to understand and convert the peoples of the non-Western world. They describe the new education, art, and music of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; they show how the curia reached beyond the bounds of Europe, to the Islamic world and even to China; and they reveal some of the conflicts that flared up when the accomplishment of church policy and the pursuit of new knowledge could not both be carried out.

The City Reborn: How the City Came Back to Life
The City Recovers: From Wasteland to Metropolis
A Library Takes Shape: Books, Benches, and Borrowers
In the Margins of the Past: Manuscripts as Historical Documents
The popes had always had a library, but in the middle of the fifteenth century they began to collect books in a new way. Nicholas V decided to create a public library for "the court of Rome"--the whole world of clerics and laymen, cardinals and scholars who inhabited the papal palace and its environs. He and Sixtus IV provided the library with a suite of rooms. These were splendidly frescoed, lighted by large windows, and furnished with elaborate wooden benches to which most books were chained. And, unlike some modern patrons, the popes of the Renaissance cared about the books as well as about the buildings that housed them. They bought, borrowed, and even stole the beautiful handwritten books of the time. The papal library soon became as spectacular a work of art, in its own way, as the Sistine Chapel or Saint Peter's. It grew rapidly; by 1455 it had 1200 books, 400 of them Greek; by 1481, a handwritten catalogue by the librarian, Platina, showed 3500 entries--by far the largest collection of books in the Western world. And it never stopped growing, thanks to bequests, purchases, and even, sometimes, military conquests.

From the start, the library had a special character. It included Bibles and works of theology and canon law, but it specialized in secular works: above all, the Greek and Latin classics, in the purest texts that the popes and their agents could find, for the popes and their servants saw these as the most powerful source of knowledge and counsel that the world possessed. The Vatican Library, in fact, became a center of the revival of classical culture known as the Renaissance. Its librarians were often distinguished scholars. Historians and philosophers, clerics and magicians visited the collections and borrowed books from them. By 1581, when the French writer Michel de Montaigne visited Rome, the treasures of the Vatican had become a mandatory stop on any well-informed traveller's Roman itinerary. To his delight, Montaigne was shown ancient Roman and ancient Chinese manuscripts, the love letters of Henry VIII, and the classics of history and philosophy (many of which can be seen in this exhibition). Then, as now, the Vatican Library was one of the greatest in the Western world.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96311
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
You present your argument as if Evolution and Creationism are two sides of a coin on equal footing, both based on belief.
They are not.
People, like myself, don't "believe" in Evolution like you believe in Creation. We accept the evidence that supports it. We understand the prevailing theory (Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection) and agree that it (Darwin's theory) is the best explanation.
Evolution itself, is not a theory by the way (before you start going down that road). It is a fact. When people say "the Theory of Evolution" they really mean Darwin's theory about how evolution occurs not a theory about whether it exists. It's just like gravity. Gravity exists, but how it actually works is best explained by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.
The only caveat I would add is that Rational people don't "Except" evolution as to me that that to the religious folks sounds like their mindset of "Belief"... Just Except the bible or some other text as the Word of God and we will all be Believers... I think rational people Understand the concept of Evolution and question it on an ongoing basis changing that understanding as new evidence is presented and verified.. Even the Scientific community falls prey to Excepting a view at times and allow it to become dogma then refuse to even consider new evidence or question old dogmatic views.. It many cases what is claimed as science is just as Belief based as any religion....

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96312
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

happy wrote:
"Scientifically speaking, it's far more probable for a life prohibiting universe to exist rather than a LIFE SUSTAINING one. Life is balanced on a RAZORS edge."
"If you are Sincerely SEEKING God, He will make His existence evident to
YOU."
William Lane Craig
Scientifically speaking, William Lane Craig doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. He's a philosopher (who specializes in theology) not an astrophysicist, let alone an exo-biologist.
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96313
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
So nothing in specific, just general insults?
Amen.
Blind to the logs of ignorance lodged in their own hate filled selves.
happy

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96314
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Incastevents .com
Unpacking atheism

And these PEOPLE "were" atheist...
happy

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96315
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>Scientifically speaking, William Lane Craig doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. He's a philosopher (who specializes in theology) not an astrophysicist, let alone an exo-biologist.
Lol..... OK.....ok...
Denial is not an excuse however
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96316
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Satanic Priest wrote:
So explain to me how your god was afraid that when man built the tower of Babble they would reach heaven and nothing would be denied them but when we built tall buildings and sent men to space your god was silent.
If man could reach heaven from a tall tower how come telescopes and spacecraft do not find heaven?
Science has yet to even hold a COMPLETE equation for a theory on "everything". Why would anyone expect telescopes and/or spacecrafts to have any more knowledge than that of what is known, tangibly seen and studied?

DO you think there's a reason even science sometimes references such studies as the "heavenly, celestial, supernal"? As in-

heavenly
adjective
1. celestial, holy, divine, blessed, blest, immortal, supernatural, angelic, extraterrestrial, superhuman, godlike, beatific, cherubic, seraphic, supernal (literary), empyrean (poetic), paradisaical heavenly beings whose function it is to serve God
celestial worldly, human, earthly, secular
2.(Informal) wonderful, lovely, delightful, beautiful, entrancing, divine (informal), glorious, exquisite, sublime, alluring, blissful, ravishing, rapturous etc etc....

HM?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96317
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
The only caveat I would add is that Rational people don't "Except" evolution as to me that that to the religious folks sounds like their mindset of "Belief"... Just Except the bible or some other text as the Word of God and we will all be Believers... I think rational people Understand the concept of Evolution and question it on an ongoing basis changing that understanding as new evidence is presented and verified.. Even the Scientific community falls prey to Excepting a view at times and allow it to become dogma then refuse to even consider new evidence or question old dogmatic views.. It many cases what is claimed as science is just as Belief based as any religion....
Sure, but that's true of everything. It's the beauty of science. When new evidence is presented, existing theories are either modified or thrown out and replaced (which is why I called Darwin's theory the "prevailing" theory). I didn't say it happens painlessly, but it happens :-)

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96318
Mar 17, 2013
 
happy wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol..... OK.....ok...
Denial is not an excuse however
What am I denying?
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96319
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientifically speaking, William Lane Craig doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. He's a philosopher (who specializes in theology) not an astrophysicist, let alone an exo-biologist.
New Pope has a Masters in CHEMISTRY.(and a couple doctorates in other areas as well)

CHEMISTRY, as in SCIENCE.....AND RELIGION---proving once again-
Science AND faith, often CAN and DO-go hand in hand.

For those with some actual functioning brain matter anyway.
happy

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96320
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>Really? The why did you ask about evolving from monkeys?
Oh GEEze...lol I forget where I am. Must I b politically correct? Lol
With all the other posts just thought it fit. Science does explain and admits there had to be a creator. I get humor from ppl who think we evolved from animals... To bad u don't c the humor. God did use a donkey ....so He can use me.... Whether u get me or not :-)
I don't get most of the nonsense on here either :-)
youtube

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96321
Mar 17, 2013
 
.

100% PROOF Pope Francis is ANTICHRIST______

https://www.youtube.com/watch...


.
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96322
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

happy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh GEEze...lol I forget where I am. Must I b politically correct? Lol
With all the other posts just thought it fit. Science does explain and admits there had to be a creator. I get humor from ppl who think we evolved from animals... To bad u don't c the humor. God did use a donkey ....so He can use me.... Whether u get me or not :-)
I don't get most of the nonsense on here either :-)
Evolution from aquatic life maybe.

"Derrrwinian Apes" falling from the sky-no flocking way.

Science is STILL asking questions! Mostly because even they, do NOT know, all there is know to have all the answers!!

(and the really funny ones to watch are the ignotards that can only pretend in pretencious hypocricy, that they do. Nothing but Abject Ignorance, if it wasn't so pathetic at times, it would be funny, but it is, so it's not).
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96323
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text> (which is why I called Darwin's theory the "prevailing" theory). I didn't say it happens painlessly, but it happens :-)
Pre-Darwinian Theories The acceptance of biological evolution click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced is an essential part of the modern scientific explanation of the natural world. Most scientists and major religions in the Western World have long since incorporated it into their understanding of nature and humanity. However, some churches still maintain that there was a special and independent creation of every species and that life forms do not change through time from generation to generation. These "creationists" often share beliefs about the Judeo-Christian Bible that were widely held, even by scientists, during the early 19th century and before The traditional Judeo-Christian version of creationism click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced was strongly reinforced by James Ussher click this icon to hear the name pronounced, a 17th century Anglican archbishop of Armagh in Northern Ireland. By counting the generations of the Bible and adding them to modern history, he fixed the date of creation at October 23, 4004 B.C. During Ussher's lifetime, debate focused only on the details of his calculations rather than on the approach. Dr. Charles Lightfoot of Cambridge University in England had the last word. He proclaimed that the time of creation was 9:00 A.M. on October 23, 4004 B.C.

This belief that the earth and life on it are only about 6000 years old fit neatly with the then prevalent theory of the "Great Chain of Being." This held that God created an infinite and continuous series of life forms, each one grading into the next, from simplest to most complex, and that all organisms, including humans, were created in their present form relatively recently and that they have remained unchanged since then. Given these strongly held beliefs, it is not surprising that 17th and 18th century European biology consisted mainly of the description of plants and animals as they are with virtually no attempt to explain how they got to be that way.
painting of Carolus Linnaeus
Carolus Linnaeus
1707-1778

The leading biological scientist of the mid 18th century was the Swedish botanist Karl von Linné(Carolus Linnaeus click this icon to hear the name pronounced in Latin). His 180 books are filled with precise descriptions of nature, but he did little analysis or interpretation. This is to be expected since Linnaeus apparently believed that he was just revealing the unchanging order of life created by God. The goal of documenting change in nature would not have made sense to him. Late in his life, however, he was troubled by the fact that plant hybrids could be created by cross pollination. These were varieties that had not existed before. Linnaeus stopped short of concluding that these plants had evolved.

Despite his limiting research bias, Linnaeus was a first class scientist. His most important contribution to science was his logical classification system for all living things which he proposed in his book Systema Naturae, first published in 1735. In this and subsequent works, he described plants and animals on the basis of physical appearance and method of reproduction. He classified them relative to each other according to the degree of their similarities. He used a binomial nomenclature click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced in naming them. That is to say, organisms were given two Latin names--genus click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced and species click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced. Each genus could have many related species. Each genus was also part of larger categories of living things. This Linnaean system of classification is today the basis for naming and describing organisms in all fields of biology.

( parlamore.edu

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96324
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

EplurbisGawduraduhmazz wrote:
<quoted text>
New Pope has a Masters in CHEMISTRY.(and a couple doctorates in other areas as well)
CHEMISTRY, as in SCIENCE.....AND RELIGION---proving once again-
Science AND faith, often CAN and DO-go hand in hand.
For those with some actual functioning brain matter anyway.
I never said that science and faith can't go together. Where did you get that? I think it's a hard thing to do though. I know a few very intelligent people who have faith. These people never proselytize and when pushed on the topic admit that their faith gives them comfort even though it doesn't make sense. And I'm fine with that.
Faith is a personal thing between you and your god. If you're not pushing it on me, or using my tax dollars to fund your faith, I'm good with it.

Unfortunately, people like my "faithful" friends are not the rational people you hear the most. You hear the zealots who want to convert as many as they can (probably because their religion dictates that they must).
EplurbisGawdurad uhmazz

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96325
Mar 17, 2013
 
youtube wrote:
.
100% PROOF Pope Francis is ANTICHRIST______
https://www.youtube.com/watch...
.
Sorry--that AUTOSPMAbot junk has already been lumped onto Obama.

Gong-do not pass go, go directly to jail. Try again-loser.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96326
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
What I find offensive is when someone berates another for what they believe with the intent of making them look stupid or less of an intelligent being. Bullying, if you will. No this is not ethical.
I prefer courtesy over insult.
If you feel a conversation is encouraging to the other party to keep believing what they believe, then you should refrain from the conversation if your only intent is to ridicule. That would be respectful.
But what if what they believe IS insultingly unintelligent? Shall I be respectful and courteous to the point of encouraging the southerner who covers his truck with stars 'n' bars and politely reinforce his claims that it is "heritage not hate?" Should one demurely abstain from conversation when he offers erroneous and confounded supportive arguments for his display?
DuhcultofOzombie tics

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96327
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
The only caveat I would add is that Rational people don't "Except" evolution as to me that that to the religious folks sounds like their mindset of "Belief"... Just Except the bible or some other text as the Word of God and we will all be Believers... I think rational people Understand the concept of Evolution and question it on an ongoing basis changing that understanding as new evidence is presented and verified.. Even the Scientific community falls prey to Excepting a view at times and allow it to become dogma then refuse to even consider new evidence or question old dogmatic views.. It many cases what is claimed as science is just as Belief based as any religion....
all haiwll the orfice of obammy, duh current po'tash...bow at duh velveteenage pikture of to lick he feet, fwee tuh ebt cawrd holders everwhere!

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96328
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

happy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh GEEze...lol I forget where I am. Must I b politically correct? Lol
With all the other posts just thought it fit. Science does explain and admits there had to be a creator. I get humor from ppl who think we evolved from animals... To bad u don't c the humor. God did use a donkey ....so He can use me.... Whether u get me or not :-)
I don't get most of the nonsense on here either :-)
You're right, I don't see the humor in your posts. I see the rantings of someone who doesn't understand what they oppose.

And no, "science" does not explain or admit that there is a creator. The fact that you would write that displays your ignorance about what "science" is.
Eplurbishwatever

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#96329
Mar 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>

Faith is a personal thing between you and your god. If you're not pushing it on me, or using my tax dollars to fund your faith, I'm good with it.
There ya go.

DING DING DING.

I have a REAL hard time understanding, what is SO complicated about that simple LOGICAL, rational thought process.

Just cannot fathom, being THAT ignorant, on EITHER side (pro or con) of the line...as to seeing it as if it should be any other way!!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 92,041 - 92,060 of128,056
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

17 Users are viewing the Barbourville Forum right now

Search the Barbourville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
KY 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 10 min brad 144,997
KY Woman's head stepped on by Rand Paul supporters (Oct '10) 1 hr LMS 26,177
KY Paul vs Conway: The Nastiest Debate Of 2010 | T... (Oct '10) 1 hr LMS 16,111
Barbourville topix 4 hr Rumors 11
Re. Maggie Milles 4 hr Just Looking 1
Truddy 5 hr Just Looking 3
looking for a mini pot belly pig 5 hr Shy 3
KC Basketball Coach 5 hr Panther Fanz 71
patrick baker arrested for donald mills murder 6 hr onefoehim 390
•••
•••
•••
•••

Barbourville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Barbourville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Barbourville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••