Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 Full story: The Courier-Journal 131,006

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.

Full Story

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101960 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.
Uh, no it's pretty clear when they describe Him, the way He would be born, the miracles He would perform, and the way He would die and rise again.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101961 May 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, huh. I use a "moniker" for real world anonymity, and a single registered account for forum identification. With a modicum of effort, anyone can find what precisely what I, ChromiuMan with the Escher print, has said to whom about what and when. Then there are those who prefer to use multiple aliases and AKA's. Pretending to be a multitude? Ashamed of mistakes? Fearful of responsibility? The basal motivations are likely furtive and deceitful, either way.
Answer: None of the above. Aside from the already aforementioned reasons of irrelevancy, it lessens the chances of zealot hater FREAKS, in being able to stalk anyone.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#101962 May 1, 2013
Howabout wrote:
<quoted text>
add Bite me then, to "Get away".
In this instance you may assume that the me part of the phrase, is a rock, covered in donkey dung frosted with glittery specks of lye compound washing powder, previously dipped in rancid terlet water, sauteed in year old goat lard, left out to cultivate it';s own microbes, in the sun of Ra.
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.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#101963 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do some of you people insist on ignorantly lumping ANY category of book, as specifically belonging to anyone person, or group of people, in particular?
Is it too difficult to understand, that some people merely view ALL books, as books, and accept them just for what they are, books, that can be read and gleened form by anyone, no matter the race, creed or colors of the readers of?
If I read a Qu'ran in a library, does that make it "my" book? If I read the Torah, does that make it "my" book? If I read the BOM, does that make it "my" book?
I mean really, assumptions like those, must be a pretty ignorant state to have to exist in.
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?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#101964 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you starting to grasp some concepts of some of the GOOD that some of these "book" type things can offer now?
Yeah, sorry, we are not ever condoning stoning one's children to death nor allowing such a law to be written ever again. Your book is wrong on morals, because it doesn't learn.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101965 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I reckon since I! made the point, I had to have had comprehension enough prior to making it- "duhmmy".
So you don't get the point (ChromiuMan's). You are an idiot.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101966 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Answer: None of the above. Aside from the already aforementioned reasons of irrelevancy, it lessens the chances of zealot hater FREAKS, in being able to stalk anyone.
LOL. You are a paranoid idiot.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101967 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
What if no one wanted to stop at red lights or stop signs?
Duhmmy.
How is that relevant?
You are an idiot. Please keep posting, this is great.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#101968 May 1, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Answer: None of the above. Aside from the already aforementioned reasons of irrelevancy, it lessens the chances of zealot hater FREAKS, in being able to stalk anyone.
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. 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. Don't feel alone, tho - from what I've seen across Topix, well over half of the other religious posters feel the same way.

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#101969 May 1, 2013
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.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101970 May 1, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, sorry, we are not ever condoning stoning one's children to death nor allowing such a law to be written ever again. Your book is wrong on morals, because it doesn't learn.
There ya go again-still stuck in ignotard mode.

Okay, so we'll try another approach-

I find your OT hangups to be loathesome.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#101971 May 1, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
So you don't get the point (ChromiuMan's). You are an idiot.
Too proud to admit-SOME (not all) women can think logically?

Got it.
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.

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
KY What's mitch McConnell done for coal, when ther... 6 min fed up 4,583
Holly Adkins (Apr '10) 14 min Concerned 21
Barbourville high school salaries WOW 1 hr Answer 10
KY 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 1 hr Nutz 153,157
KY Woman's head stepped on by Rand Paul supporters (Oct '10) 2 hr Go Blue Forever 26,266
Republicans have tunnel vision!! 5 hr God 74
Breeze Gregory 8 hr Holly blevins 3
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••