Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 141354 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.

ScienceProves

London, KY

#101972 May 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
So the answer is paranoia.
Sorry, using multiple nicks wouldn't stop a stalker. If someone tracks your internet protocol and media access control address, it doesn't make any difference what you call yourself.
Well there ya go-a deterrent for some at least.

Now quit mucking the IO channels, "just because ya don't see it...." ya moron.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101973 May 1, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
How is that relevant?
You are an idiot. Please keep posting, this is great.
"I can only explain it to you...but I refuse to THINK for you!"

Worm.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#101974 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
There ya go again-still stuck in ignotard mode.
Okay, so we'll try another approach-
I find your OT hangups to be loathesome.
"The best way to avoid an escalated confrontation is by being rational, reasonable and respectful in the first place. I'm sorry, I understand that would take all of the fun out of your posting."

On the one hand, we have those who claim that the New Testament fulfilled the covenant and the Deuteronomic and Mosaic Laws are done.(We can now eat catfish, blutwurst, pork and lobster with impunity.) On the other hand, 300 years ago, Christians were burning people at the stake, 150 years ago Christians were owning people and 21 months ago (Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day), Christians were all about quoting Leviticus.
"OT hangups?"
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101975 May 1, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
You know what... this is just stupid. Completely stupid. I think it's time to clarify positions here. So, please, tell me which of these matches you:
1. Believes there is sufficient evidence to prove God's existence.
2. Does not believe that there is (or does not know if there is) sufficient evidence to prove God's existence, but has absolute faith in God's existence regardless.
3. Does not believe that there is (or does not know if there is) sufficient evidence to prove God's existence.
4. Believes that there is sufficient evidence to disprove God's existence.
These are all encompassing, so there is no need for discussion yet. Please, just give a number.
I am 3.
5. Irrelevant, people are individuals, that can think and speak for themselves, as well as define their own categories of thought, which when all "encompassed" is actually none of any one's business anyway.

I am a number 5.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101976 May 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
"The best way to avoid an escalated confrontation is by being rational, reasonable and respectful in the first place. I'm sorry, I understand that would take all of the fun out of your posting."
On the one hand, we have those who claim that the New Testament fulfilled the covenant and the Deuteronomic and Mosaic Laws are done.(We can now eat catfish, blutwurst, pork and lobster with impunity.) On the other hand, 300 years ago, Christians were burning people at the stake, 150 years ago Christians were owning people and 21 months ago (Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day), Christians were all about quoting Leviticus.
"OT hangups?"
Mmmm..catfish. For some though, as rough on the gut as watching some of that dark age..under a rock, barbaricness of being mired in OT Mental_ity is.

To the actually already enlightened anyway.

Have a nice day,plebeians, lol.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101977 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
"I can only explain it to you...but I refuse to THINK for you!"
Worm.
Plagiarizing posts from Q-man now? You are an idiot.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101978 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
"I can only explain it to you...but I refuse to THINK for you!"
Worm.
Were you signing this post as "Worm"? Is this Dennis Rodman?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101979 May 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
"The best way to avoid an escalated confrontation is by being rational, reasonable and respectful in the first place. I'm sorry, I understand that would take all of the fun out of your posting."...
You know, you're right. I think my recent exchanges with "curious" have pushed me over an edge.

To the user "ScienceProves", I apologize for repeatedly calling you an idiot. It's not your fault you are the way you are.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#101980 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
There ya go again-still stuck in ignotard mode.
Okay, so we'll try another approach-
I find your OT hangups to be loathesome.
So then morals are not absolute in your bible either.

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#101981 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
5. Irrelevant, people are individuals, that can think and speak for themselves, as well as define their own categories of thought, which when all "encompassed" is actually none of any one's business anyway.
I am a number 5.
No, you're not. Idiot. You are one of the 4. If it's nobody's business than stop posting.
Les B Fair

Lexington, KY

#101982 May 1, 2013
Mark Twain defined faith thusly:
"Faith is believing in things that you know ain't so."

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101983 May 1, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
You know what... this is just stupid. Completely stupid. I think it's time to clarify positions here. So, please, tell me which of these matches you:
1. Believes there is sufficient evidence to prove God's existence.
2. Does not believe that there is (or does not know if there is) sufficient evidence to prove God's existence, but has absolute faith in God's existence regardless.
3. Does not believe that there is (or does not know if there is) sufficient evidence to prove God's existence.
4. Believes that there is sufficient evidence to disprove God's existence.
These are all encompassing, so there is no need for discussion yet. Please, just give a number.
I am 3.
I'm assuming this was a request to all.

3 here as well.

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#101984 May 1, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm assuming this was a request to all.
3 here as well.
Thank you.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101985 May 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite the self portrait. I see you have far deeper identity issues than I could have imagined. Some say prayer and meditation is cathartic. Would you consider turning to God?
If I were to say "Bite me" you may assume that the "me" part of the phrase looks a little like Escher would have if he'd put on about 40 lbs.
1. Would you consider turning to....

The way I understand it, that's not exactly how it works, thus the Trinity part. In any case-
I believe in anything harmless that can be spiritually uplifting, including prayers and meditation.

2. You may assume that the....
I don't like that word, just making assumptions can lead people to be soooo off base...ie: wrong. I'll have to look up this Escher thing..a d get back to you on the rest of it in about an HOUR.
o_0
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101986 May 1, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're not. Idiot. You are one of the 4. If it's nobody's business than stop posting.
None of the four of YOUR labelduhm ignorant labels is applicable.
Too bad for you.
Don't like my posts, don't read them, because You have NO right--or say, especially to tell ANY one else what to post about what they personally say about themselves, or not.

NO right -whatsoever.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101987 May 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You worship the book, you claim it's claims are all true, it's your book. Now, where's that evidence supporting the claims made in that book?
WTH are you babbling about? Your own Self projection?

I, like MANY people, read a lot of books.

Grow up, and get a clue...a brain..or something.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101988 May 1, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm assuming this was a request to all.
3 here as well.
The Agnostic or the atheist category part of "question 3"?

(Five? Six? Section A or B lol)

No need to lump it all inside a little box of labels here, your posts speak for yourself enough!!
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101989 May 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So then morals are not absolute in your bible either.
Are such ever absolute, as we read of in the Bible, or even through out the history of humanity?
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101990 May 1, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, you're right. I think my recent exchanges with "curious" have pushed me over an edge.
To the user "ScienceProves", I apologize for repeatedly calling you an idiot. It's not your fault you are the way you are.
I've been called worse, no doubt. Even recently maybe lol.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#101992 May 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is not true.
You are talking about a subject called Ancient Interpretation. It is the way people used to read the Bible, as scholars, before more information was known and before the Enlightenment.
By that way of reading you can easily make an argument that OJ Simpson was foretold in the Hebrew Bible. This is because of the incredibly broad way that things were interpreted. They would read a passage in Genesis that was puzzling, then find something in some other book that could be construed to reflect it in some way. Or vice versa.
There's an example of this in the Jewish tradition. The story of Abraham being told to kill his son. In that story there is no mention of Satan at all. But the Jewish interpreters, using the same kind of methods you probably are basing your ideas on, found that there was a word at the beginning of the story that meant "things" but could also mean "words". So they said "These words came before" or something like that. So then they said, that must mean there was something said prior to the story. What could it be? So they searched and found the book of Job and the tale of Satan challenging God. So then they assumed that the "words" that came before MUST have been Satan challenging God to test Job.
So their interpretation was that God was basically taking a bet with the devil, like he did in Job. That would give him some reason to do this terrible thing.
But that isn't in the text. Anywhere.
And that is one example of how you can get Jesus from a text that never mentions Jesus.
Let us look at what Jesus claimed about himself,,,,Which no one else ever has claimed about themselves
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

"You search the Scriptures because you think they give you eternal life.... you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,...

If You Believed Moses, You Would Believe Me, for He Wrote of Me
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.

21 And he began to say unto them, THIS DAY,THIS SCRIPTURE IS FULFILLED BEFORE YOUR EYES

The claims he made,were made in the presence of the Pharisees,Saducees, Scribes and Lawyers

At no time,did anyone make any effort to dispute or challenge his claims .

In the Old testament there are over 40 prophecies that point to and were fulfilled by

Christ,regarding his birthplace,his birth,his ministry,that he would be betrayed,crucified and his resurrection,among others.

Not one person,other than Christ,has made the claim to be The Messiah and claim that the Scriptures testify to that fact.

Can you explain how this method of,Ancient Interpretation, when applied to all the prophecies that were fulfilled in Christ, invalidates them, and on what basis are they invalidated.?

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
house cleaner wanted younger lady 40 min just me telling t... 12
Is the Knox co courthouse still performing marr... 48 min NoGod 9
keith Ledford 1 hr funny 1
employees at barbourville burger king 4 hr bk lover 1
sabrina corey 4 hr just me telling t... 10
parkway pharmacy 5 hr Dont know 2
Jason Marsee shot Ford Collett 5 hr Question 37
More from around the web

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages