Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 Read more: The Courier-Journal 135,210

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.

Read more
TruthIs

Glenpool, OK

#98438 Apr 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, correcting myself:
Mark is the first of the gospels, not Luke. Luke and Matthew are basically taken directly from Mark with some stuff that may come from an unknown source called Q.
Q of Alzhiemers Bush should only be taken with grains of salt-in that case, mostly because of the tequila that follows the book of beer in the gospels of Q.
NEPHILIM

United States

#98440 Apr 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if this is accurate. The earliest gospels date back to decades after Christ died. If men alive at the time who knew enough to remember it were still knocking around later around the time that the author of Luke was writing then they would have been pretty old, I think.
I'll have to do some research. I'm going by memory. I know Luke was first (and it had the fewest miracles and no claim that Jesus was God). The others came later and they each added more and more layers of total nonsense like miracles and such. That's how mythology grows.
I think Mark wrote first and the others just pretty much plagiarized him. There is something about a Q source but I can't look it up right now. The Secret Gospel of Mark I think predates them all and has the verses that are missing out of the Mark we have today. It's worth checking out, just not a lot to go on.
NEPHILIM

United States

#98441 Apr 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, correcting myself:
Mark is the first of the gospels, not Luke. Luke and Matthew are basically taken directly from Mark with some stuff that may come from an unknown source called Q.
My bad, I should of read ahead. Glad we agree.
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98442 Apr 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, OK. God is a time traveler. He gets in his God Delorian and zips ahead in time, seeing the entire stretch of human existence. Then he zips back in time to watch it unfold.
If we *truly* have free will then the events that God watches unfold will not occur exactly as they did when he zipped ahead in time. Therefore God does not know the future. If they happen exactly as they did when he zipped ahead then free will does not exist and we are determined to do what we do.
If anyone lacks an understanding of basic logic it is not me.
Now, back to my question. Do you or do you not understand the flaw in your logic?
Look at it another way. If Ben knows Jane then Ben cannot also NOT know Jane. These are mutually exclusive states of being. Ben either knows Jane or Ben does not know Jane.
God either knows what we will do or he does not know what we will do. If he knows what we will do then we are not free to choose. It must be this way, logically. It is not my opinion, it is the necessary rules of logic.
Your Delorean comment is simply trite. I clearly pointed out to anyone who has a good command of the English language that time traveler was an analogy, a simplification because you canít fathom apparently the concept of God existing outside of Time.
God observing you, does not determine your actions. If you witness a bank robbery, should you be charged with masterminding it?
It is your attempt at logic that has failed. You keep assuming that Godís knowledge somehow determines an outcome. That is your assumption that is false. Your assumption is wrong therefore your conclusion is invalid. It fails the test of logic.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#98443 Apr 4, 2013
You are simply wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Itís all about the free will. If God stops you, you donít have free will. How you deal with adversity, how you deal with death is just as important as how you deal with life and happiness. Itís part of what determines the mettle of your soul and determines if you are worthy or unworthy.
Your atheist show is probably right from the standpoint of the rapist. She forgot the standpoint of the child. If that child was sentient and sapient and had an immortal soul, most likely she was too young to be evil and an eternity in Heaven is worth any suffering endured on Earth.
Can't get your head around the 'omniscience = no free will' concept can you? It must be that differential calculus getting in the way. Would you mind sharing the equation(s) that mathematically "prove" free will as you claimed?
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98444 Apr 4, 2013
Satanic Priest wrote:
<quoted text>Than why isn't Romney President???
Because we have him on tape lying virtually every day of the campaign
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98445 Apr 4, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<
If your god knew what we would choose to do and didn't want that to happen...why create us? Is he stupid??
Again, you are assuming that people are the purpose of creation
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98446 Apr 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution is nothing more that Extreme Science Fiction

..
Who are you to complain about Godís methods? God and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Evolution is Godís method
Life evolves, species evolve, we have evolved and are still evolving. Our current form is not likely going to be the same in 100,000 generations. We are not a fixed point in time. We arenít Godís plan. We are a small part of it.
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98447 Apr 4, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I believe it to be highly probable that life exists outside of our solar system.
Agree. If God likes to create, then it is doubtful that He'd necessarily start or stop with our solar system
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98448 Apr 4, 2013
TruthIs wrote:
<quoted text>
and NO, NO, NO and NO.
Nor do I feel some socio-illogical need to even pretend to be.:-).
Then donít say that you translated it. Say the translation that you prefer.
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98449 Apr 4, 2013
TruthIs wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. The one I reference to was about 543 million years ago until 490 million years ago.
LOL Thatís an even more distant epoch than the Jurassic! Thatís absolutely ridiculous for you to bring that up to say anything about humans!

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#98450 Apr 4, 2013
You are simply wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Again, you are assuming that people are the purpose of creation
How so? I'm simply reiterating what you stated and asking a question about what you posited. I'm starting to think that you don't even understand your own position.
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98451 Apr 4, 2013
excuse me wrote:
The New Testament was written by men who were either eyewitnesses themselves, or who related from the eyewitnesses their personal accounts of the actual incidents and teachings of Christ.
The council of Nicea was about 300 years later. There were no actual witnesses to interview
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98452 Apr 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
But I already showed how free will is incompatible with a perfect god.
Also, prove souls exist.
No, you simply parroted the fallacy of Calvin and predestination, which was just a cop out so he could break his vows
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98453 Apr 4, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't get your head around the 'omniscience = no free will' concept can you? It must be that differential calculus getting in the way. Would you mind sharing the equation(s) that mathematically "prove" free will as you claimed?
You are simply wrong. That is merely an ad hominem. Go back and read about symbolic logic.
You are simply wrong

Beattyville, KY

#98454 Apr 4, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
How so? I'm simply reiterating what you stated and asking a question about what you posited. I'm starting to think that you don't even understand your own position.
That is called a strawman argument and is a fallacy because you are attributing to me what someone else said.
TruthIs

Glenpool, OK

#98455 Apr 4, 2013
You are simply wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Then donít say that you translated it. Say the translation that you prefer.
That's what I said,(@your level now)imbecile.

Sorry YOU could NOT comprehend it.

Try a reading comprehension class for lilcommieTics. Maybe you'll feewl bettuh, dolt.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#98456 Apr 4, 2013
excuse me wrote:
<quoted text>
The Old Testament & Messianic Prophecy
There is one test that we can apply to all Ďsacred writingsí.... The Test Of Prophecy - the foretelling of future events. Surely a book claiming to be God's Word will contain His statements about His purpose, and predictions for the future. If you compare the Ďdivineí books such as the Bhagavad-Gita and the Koran, you will find that they contain hardly any prophecies, and certainly none that are as specific as those of the Bible and which have been fulfilled to the letter. Biblical prophecies commonly give details of actual events to occur; Actual geographic locations; Actual people (sometimes named before they were born); Actual nations, all of which would be involved in certain world events. It is a simple matter to ascertain whether such prophecies have been fulfilled or not
The Odds Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter ó no errors.(The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.) Since the probability for any one of these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance averages less than one in ten (figured very conservatively) and since the prophecies are for the most part independent of one another, the odds for all these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance without error is less than one in 102000 (that is 1 with 2000 zeros written after it)!
1) You do not refute my statement, you just indicate that you don't like how I said it.
2) There ARE failed prophecies in the Bible.
3)Who has that list of "2,500 prophecies?" Who and what determines whether they have been fulfilled? Let's look at a couple examples of what constitutes a "prophecy" to a Messianic scholar.
Gen. 3:15-He will bruise Satan's head.....
Deut. 21:23...Cursed is he that hangs on a tree...
Psa. 72:16...The corn of wheat to fall into the Ground...
It appears that Dr. Ross greatly and liberally loaded his statistics. He should mind his 9th commandment.
4)"Prophecies" that were allegorical to begin with and interpretive at the conclusion are not "prophecies."
5)Filling in the blanks to MAKE a prophecy work does NOT work - even if it is done by several teams of esteemed bishops over the course of centuries.
TruthIs

Glenpool, OK

#98457 Apr 4, 2013
You are simply wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Then donít say that you translated it. Say the translation that you prefer.
To "Sorry "BUT" YOU are wrong"

Heyuh-now try reading it again!

I disagree with YOUR interpretation.
My translation of Bible for modern day world living (versus the wickedness of ways as found within the OT) says we are to LOVE and respect, and be kind one to another. NOT hate, maim, torture, taunt, bully, push, shove, connive, manipulate and whatever other negative dredges of negative negatives.
I feel sorry for you, if you think life should be lived so negatively, because it shouldn't.

Notice the emphasis on MY this time-for that speshull impactive effect.

MY translation of--as in MY interprative opinion.

NOT Yours-or anyone elses.

MY opinion.

Is THAT simple enough for YOU'RE WRONGness?

Hope so, can't make it much simpler than that.

Have a nice day.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#98458 Apr 4, 2013
excuse me wrote:
The New Testament was written by men who were either eyewitnesses themselves, or who related from the eyewitnesses their personal accounts of the actual incidents and teachings of Christ. It is beyond doubt that the New Testament accounts of Christ were circulated within the lifetimes of those who witnessed his life. It is also a fact that these people (some friendly, others hostile to the gospel) would confirm or deny the accuracy of the accounts. The bitter opponents of Jesus and his disciples would have leapt at the opportunity to discredit the claims concerning his life, death and resurrection, if the writings being circulated were untrue.
Presumptive and unsubstantiated. There were many, many writings and gospels floating around in the first couple of centuries that did not make it into the Book. There are no accounts written in the first person. There are both discrepancies and overlaps between books that indicate that the final product was a result of collaboration and editing. Your Book is more errant than you would ever consider.
Mind your 9th commandment.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Explosion in Flatlick? 24 min Stew 10
Keith Ledford and Kayla grubb 41 min lucky 2
dell desktop win 8 1 hr travis 3
Tim Corey 3 hr man 6
lets go to florida 3 hr Hatti_Hollerand 91
1998 jeep grand cherokee laredo need help 6 hr Good Luck too 6
is Terry Smith dating mossie. Brown 11 hr family 2
More from around the web

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]