Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 143097 comments on the The Courier-Journal story from Feb 10, 2010, titled Bible study rules for public schools proposed. In it, The Courier-Journal reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Courier-Journal.

JJG

Glasgow, KY

#100434 Apr 21, 2013
What is really funny is that most Christians will end up in hell, according to the Bible on 12,000 will enter the kingdom of heaven.
what

Elkhorn City, KY

#100435 Apr 21, 2013
JJG wrote:
What is really funny is that most Christians will end up in hell, according to the Bible on 12,000 will enter the kingdom of heaven.
revelations says 144,000 go to heaven....12k from each of the 12 original tribes of israel

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100436 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
No no. They didn't all condemn it, they just didn't worry about it. It wasn't an issue for over a hundred years because there were a scarce few blacks anywhere near Utah. Even today a black person will tell you they feel like a fly in a bowl of milk. Once more blacks started to join the church, it became a matter of concern, so the prophet asked God, and received the revelation that all worthy males could receive the priesthood.
It's a red flag today because our society is different. Just like marrying a 14 year old is no longer acceptable, though it happened for thousands of years before.
Are you joking? I was in the church when the rule changed. I lived in Florida. Utah is not the only place Mormons were then or now. Evidently someone is feeding you a bunch of lies or else it is you who is willfully lying.
Their was controversy long before your superior prophets took a second to ask god. They did not worry about it because even our government was not to worried about it. Seems your perfect prophets just barely kept up with the times of government. Far from superior.
Sorry took so long to respond, had some computer problems.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100437 Apr 21, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>According to you!
None do good... for no reason!
Note the part where I said "you have the extreme position"?

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Of course you have the biased extreme position that atheist never do good just because they like to do good. Of course this is an insane and false position to take, just as it was a false claim the bible took. You are both wrong.]
But thanks for proving my main point. The passage just breeds hate.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100438 Apr 21, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
It is good that the LDS changed their tune about racism. I like that, and I applaud it. Bravo.
But I have a problem with the whole affair.
Your founder was not quite as racist as everyone else. I think, honestly, he was probably a very interesting guy. Probably nice, probably fascinating to hang around. I think he was a total fraud, of course, and I think he was a huckster. But I like those characters, honestly.
Then we get Brigham Young. For many decades.
"It was Smith’s successor, Brigham Young, who adopted the policies that now haunt the church. He described black people as cursed with dark skin as punishment for Cain’s murder of his brother.“Any man having one drop of the seed of Cane in him cannot hold the priesthood,” he declared in 1852. Young deemed black-white intermarriage so sinful that he suggested that a man could atone for it only by having “his head cut off” and spilling “his blood upon the ground.” Other Mormon leaders convinced themselves that the pre-existent spirits of black people had sinned in heaven by supporting Lucifer in his rebellion against God. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/opinion/sun...
And let's not forget who composed the little ditty that gave Young a divine mandate to be a raging asshole:
2 Nephi 5:21
"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, and they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them"
Personally I don't see how you can accept the BoM as being true, or divine, given that sort of ignorance. And that is just one little passage.
How can anyone believe a book that has this passage in it?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100439 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that Brigham seemed arrogant in his own bad opinions. But again, I don't see that those opinions were inspired. They were never put into the Doctrine and Covenants as scripture for a reason.
So again this begs the question that you avoid, what is the point of a prophet if he can be so wrong?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100440 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I already have. And I already commented on it. They were slow to realize that they should ask God what they should do. Once the prophet did, he received the revelation that allowed blacks to hold the priesthood. And the proclamation did not say, NOW blacks may hold the priesthood. It reads to me like it should have always been that way. My opinion is that Brigham messed up, but no one questioned him.
No one questioning his is the point. If you have someone held up on a pedestal called a prophet of god, followers tend not to question the relayed word of the supposed god.
This is one reason all holy books are faulty also.
Their were civil rights battles raging in the decades before your church got with the program, so acting as if it were not a valid question in those days is laughable.
The controversy lead me to leave the church and I think eventually lead me to realize god is a myth altogether.
Maybe people in your church need to question a bit more.
Guardian Angel

Charleston, WV

#100441 Apr 21, 2013
The wondering atheist,Do you breath air?Where do you suppose it comes from?See, your wrong when you think that Christians have to prove that god exist.You have to prove that he don't.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100442 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel free to review the previous posts regarding this conversation. I've already put it in context the best I can with the way the majority of the country mistakenly felt about blacks.
So your church, god or prophet can only keep up with the moral progress of America? First off, civil rights bills were enacted for black people over a decade before your prophet asked his supposed god. What took so long? Your church is lagging behind the times pal.Religion seems to always lag behind.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100443 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
*facepalm
Dude, I wasn't being insulting. I didn't think you would go back several pages to catch up, because it seems you were missing some of the conversation. I just didn't want to recap.
Believe it or not, that mentality in America existed in 1978, and still does today in many places. What I said was that the way most revelations occured with this dispensation, someone asked God about something, and then received the revelation because they took the initiative to ask. Should this have been dealt with sooner? Absolutely. So I made an assumption that based on the rest of society and their attitude towards blacks, it wasn't something that seemed out of place, so attention stayed focused elsewhere, such as missionary work, temple building, etc.
What about Hauns Mill? That doesn't seem relevant to any of these conversations that are going on, nor do you use enough verbiage (amazingly) for me to understand what your question is here. So I don't know what this means.
That mentality will always exist with the ignorant. To bad the "one true church" was so ignorant for that hundred years or so.
Point is, if you are going to claim "truth" and are proved to not have full truth, you are a failure at the game of god perfection expectation. Now if your prophets are just fallible men as you and I are, then stop calling them prophets and get off your high horse. Your church is no more true than any other.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100444 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess I'm not sure what point you are trying to drive home.
In our church, we do not judge each other's worthiness as members. There is one instance in when a conversation of worthiness happens. It is when applying for a Temple Recommend. Since the Temple is the House of the Lord, God requires that some preparation be made before entering the Temple. For example, you would make sure you removed your muddy shoes before walking in on your mother's new white carpet. But even in this conversation, your answers are not verified. They trust that you are being honest. So it is still between the person and God. Because if someone chose to lie to the Bishop, the Bishop would not really be affected if this person went to the Temply unworthy. The person that lied will have to answer for that to God only.
So to me, I think it is easy to distinguish that within the church, we do not rank people. In our social lives, we have been trained to try to put people into buckets, so these thoughts still occur, but it holds no merit in the church as far as callings and responsibilities go.
So your prophets are equals? Give me a break. Their is a leadership ladder (rank) in the Mormon church.
Maybe question your prophet on that?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100445 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case, yes. Same as how polygamy was revived through Smith. He read about it in the OT and asked God why this was allowed since it was so taboo in the 1800's in America.
As far as justified? No, I've said at least 4 times that I didn't think it was justified and that it should have never been said by Brigham, and that it was his opinion.
Hauns Mill
Are we talking about the same thing?
Missourians slaughtering men, women, and children because they were Mormon.
I see the predjudice correlation, but what's your question?
Guess no one dared to question the almighty prophet on that one either. See the inherent failure of having a prophet? This is just evidence your church is not the one true church. True churches do not have such massive mistakes by the one who supposedly is instructed personally by a god.
It is a simply logic/reason test.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100446 Apr 21, 2013
-NEPHILIM- wrote:
<quoted text>
Fifty years from now there will probably be someone saying the same thing about homosexuals being allowed to hold the priesthood.
Yes, maybe someone should question the prophet now?

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I already have. And I already commented on it. They were slow to realize that they should ask God what they should do. Once the prophet did, he received the revelation that allowed blacks to hold the priesthood. And the proclamation did not say, NOW blacks may hold the priesthood. It reads to me like it should have always been that way. My opinion is that Brigham messed up, but no one questioned him.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100447 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Homosexuals can hold the priesthood now
Of course you mean if they claim to not have homosexual relations.
It is no secret your church opposes gay marriage. Again, behind the times of much of our government.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#100448 Apr 21, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct. Homosexuality is a sin when acted upon. If they do not engage in the act, it is not a sin.
First, acting as if you know it is a sin is a problem. Second, you act as if all in the priesthood never sin.
But of course you take your church's stance without question, clearly.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#100449 Apr 21, 2013
Luke 20
King James Version (KJV)

8 And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

9 Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.

10 And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.

11 And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.

12 And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.

13 Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.

14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.

“There is no god”

Since: Jul 12

War, WV

#100451 Apr 22, 2013
Guardian Angel wrote:
The wondering atheist,Do you breath air?Where do you suppose it comes from?See, your wrong when you think that Christians have to prove that god exist.You have to prove that he don't.
Than from your perspective You have to prove that your god is not evil (and from your bible your god is evil and the people who worship your god worship evil)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#100452 Apr 22, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>I like the rest of it too!
John
5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if
another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
5:44 How can ye believe, who receive honor one from another, and
seek not the honor that [cometh] from God only?
5:45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is
[one] that accuseth you,[even] Moses, in whom ye trust.
5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for
he wrote concerning me.
5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my
words?
You present no evidence supporting your assertions, dismissed.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#100453 Apr 22, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
...
Does that mean that you believe his teachings are valid?Or that his teachings sound good and should be adhered to?
Is it not contradictory to say that, "you like his teachings
but,do not think he existed?If you like his teachings,but do not think he existed,then why are you attributing those teachings to him.
I am not being sarcastic,but,I am puzzled by your response.
I like a lot of the things that the character Jesus was about. Compassion, forgiveness, feeding the hungry, clothing the poor...etc. Who wouldn't, at some level, appreciate those "teachings"?
I also happen to like the Arthurian legends and think they can serve a role in teaching about honor and chivalry. Does that mean I have to believe King Arthur to be real? No, of course not.
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
You also stated that"I don't scoff at all who believe. I scoff at those who believe and try to "prove" their belief by logic and reason"
You are attributing to me,something that is inaccurate,as I have never tried to prove the reasons for my beliefs,by logic and reason.
You have repeatedly made statements to the effect of "these events are logical and cannot be disproved by science..." or something else equally hyperbolic.
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
...
Then,you asked me" How so? In reference to what I had written
(curious wrote: Therefore,they scoff at or , attack those who believe,as is pointed out in the parable..)
Now ,you kmow the parable to which I was reffering,
""Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and attack you"
I would like to know,what you may understand that parable to mean?And if you don't know,simply say so.
Once you respond,then,I will tell you my interpretation of what it means,with,which,you may or may not agree.
What does it mean to me? It means do not give sacred things (which is subjective) to those who do not (or cannot) appreciate them.

Kind of like those of us who try to reason with you. We're "casting our pearls before swine" when any of us lay out a rational explanation for something that you've posited, and you ignore it or (more likely) respond with insults.

“There is no god”

Since: Jul 12

War, WV

#100454 Apr 22, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
I like a lot of the things that the character Jesus was about. Compassion, forgiveness, feeding the hungry, clothing the poor...etc. Who wouldn't, at some level, appreciate those "teachings"?

<quoted text>
What does it mean to me? It means do not give sacred things (which is subjective) to those who do not (or cannot) appreciate them.
Kind of like those of us who try to reason with you. We're "casting our pearls before swine" when any of us lay out a rational explanation for something that you've posited, and you ignore it or (more likely) respond with insults.
If that is what jesus taught than how come christians are against those things and instead worship social status, wealth, and placing themselves above others? How is it that christians judge every one else when their jesus told them not to?
I like what it says in Matthew 25:32-45 but christians do not follow this.
I read a quote that said "I like your christ, but I do not like your christians"
Needed health care, food, sheltr, equal rights all of these are what christians are against for others. They want them for themselves but others may not have them

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
laptops 4 sale 17 min John 8
Who's had Curt brown 22 min A real man 42
Wet Vote Petition 22 min Nimbletwig 21
Guess what I've got? 25 min Nimbletwig 1
Wes Craven Dead at age 76. 34 min Nimbletwig 1
Is judge ex Jm hall going to prison ? 1 hr Jailbird 10
Jerry Barnes 1 hr Friend 17
walmart shooting 10 hr sittin ducks 18
Shooting at Walmart??? 10 hr People 50
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages