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
97,821 - 97,840 of 130,498 Comments Last updated 40 min ago

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102391 May 4, 2013
Raina wrote:
<quoted text>They were looking for a messiah that had the appearance of a king to begin with. It all started when Jesus was born. You must know the story with King Herod. The message of the Angel spread quickly. Who would have believed the Messiah was born in a stable? Etc. Etc. "That's how the fight started." Yet OT prophecy foretold that He would "come forth as a root out of dry ground, having no comliness that any should 'desire' Him". He came to His own and they received Him not. You know the story. Today the Jews are still at the wailing wall praying for the Messiah to come. It will all be over with one day and they will still be there at the wall. It was never that they didn't get an answer, they just didn't want that answer. It happened just as prophecy claimed it would. Problem is people do not search the Scriptures. All the answers are there if one bothers to look. The Jews have no idea that they have been freed from the bondage of the Law.
I suppose when you base your religion upon the idea that the king is somehow the main man talking to god, I can see why the Jews would expect such.
They think King David was such a man, they think Moses was such a man, so why would they not expect the Messiah not to be such a man?

Of course it is quite stupid to think kings are the man man talking to god. But you base your beliefs upon this concept also if you believe Jesus was a descendant of king David.

But we know most every king in those days made claim they were the one to listen to about what god wants.

Have you watched "The Bible" series on the history channel yet? The story really illustrates this concept. It is a story of politics and how leaders use god to claim authority over people.
You and your kind just have no figured out this is a propaganda tactic that has zero basis in actual truth of a god.

Some political leaders today are fighting to put the bible into schools as part of this propaganda tactic.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#102392 May 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>The structure is a result of the valence of the atoms, actually, same concept in molecular folding, same thing that allows blood to carry oxygen as well. I often refer to it as the polarity of the atoms, which is improper lingo but I can never spell the correct words correctly so it works.

Basically it boils down to this: You know next to nothing about scientific understanding, the actual facts of how the universe works, so instead of taking the time and putting in the effort to learn them, you buy a made up, non-answer in place of them and decide to believe that. Instead of seeking the truth of the matter, you bought a myth from someone else.
Don't assume I know nothing. Your assumptions about my lack of knowledge in science is an excuse to not answer the question apparently.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#102393 May 4, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, but what about David Koresh?
That which I posted "2 postings" addressed the differences between
the Comedy of Errors approach used by Yiagio and my approach,as stated by scriptures.
The differences between the 2 and their validity,is the issue that you should be addressing,which you did not.
That is not surprising,because when you are confronted with a question that you are unable or unwilling to answer,you merely dismiss them as irrelevant or,for fear that the answer will only serve to erode the basis for youer beliefs,will not answer at all.
Your question regarding David Koresh exemplifies how little you know about Scriptures.
He was a false prophet,and he did not fulfill bible prophecy.
Jesus,clearly spoke on that issue,,,By their fruits you will know them....

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102394 May 4, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not actually, even if the fictional spideyboy does have nice manners of make believe, the difference is, Your illogic is imaginary.
Mine (Simcha Jacobovici for example) is based on reality.
Sorry-but I'm not in to delusions of cartoonish, comic book predecessor make believe.
Yet your bible and its claims seem just as cartoonish to us as Spiderman. You claim spiderman is imaginary, yet you cannot show any more evidence for your god than we can for spiderman.
You simply have not tried to believe in spiderman with all your heart. You have not tried to live the ways of spiderman.

This is what I hear when you make claims of god.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#102395 May 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Tell us how they were put in place by a god? Better yet, show some evidence they were put in place by a god?
I'm really not trying to be a jerk, I'm asking you guys how it happened because you are telling me there is no God. So I'm just trying to find out how it happened without a God. Why can't you just answer the question instead of turning it on me? We've already talked about my beliefs. Why is everyone so defensive when I ask what you guys think?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#102396 May 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You asked way more than one question, try narrowing it down to maybe two questions then perhaps I will know how to answer them.
Just pick one
ScienceProves

London, KY

#102397 May 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Am I supposed to know what you are eluding to? If you have a point or an idea, explain it.
...that the very limited thought processes of mere bwack and white simplicity, derived of data gathered solely from inside of little square boxes containing just more of the same type of mere self promotional justification of personal opinions per say...is BORING.

Science for the FAR more interesting spin alex lol.
:-)

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102398 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing I disagree with is that marriage helps someone stay monogamous. I'm not ignoring your point, I just disagree with it.
Also, I never said to deny gays the same rights. Please don't assume that is my stance.
Well then just what is your stance? I assumed it was your stance because you argue against the points for gay marriage and your church is against gay marriage.

I hear the argument from the religious all the time that marriage is the path to monogamy. It is one of the few points I have an agreement with them on. Strange how we disagree on this.

One of my main gripes about religion is, they constantly push for laws based upon religious doctrine that has no basis of logic or other reasons. You have yet to show any reasons homosexuals should be denied the privilege of marriage. But it is no secret your church poured money into a campaign to not allow gay marriage (prop 8).

I like to discuss religion because it is an interesting topic, but what really drives a passion in me to talk about religion is when people try to make law based upon these superstitious beliefs.

So please keep this in mind as you wonder why I keep asking questions about your religion.
I really think most atheists would give you religious people less of a hassle if the religious stopped using the superstitious doctrine as a basis to make law.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#102399 May 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I suppose when you base your religion upon the idea that the king is somehow the main man talking to god, I can see why the Jews would expect such.
They think King David was such a man, they think Moses was such a man, so why would they not expect the Messiah not to be such a man?
Of course it is quite stupid to think kings are the man man talking to god. But you base your beliefs upon this concept also if you believe Jesus was a descendant of king David.
But we know most every king in those days made claim they were the one to listen to about what god wants.
Have you watched "The Bible" series on the history channel yet? The story really illustrates this concept. It is a story of politics and how leaders use god to claim authority over people.
You and your kind just have no figured out this is a propaganda tactic that has zero basis in actual truth of a god.
Some political leaders today are fighting to put the bible into schools as part of this propaganda tactic.
Secular history per Maccabees, Herods..Antipator..Caliphs..Go dfrey..Sherifs.. etc? Bueller, Duke-etty...Simacovich...

(and plz do not compare the realistic secular histories of Judea to the mythical cartoonishness of Camelot. Thank you in advance.)

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#102400 May 4, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
If this isn't "gotcha", then why did you move the goalposts? I answered the previous question and a new one gets introduced. NOBODY claimed an "infinite amount of evidence" concerning your new question, fool. Nobody. Stop putting words in other people's mouths. Try reading. And tell me how many times more 1 is than 0.

To answer your new question, or at least the point I think you are trying to play "gotcha" with, I do not have any real opinion of the events that occurred prior to the point in time that the entire universe consisted of a quark-gluon plasma. The underlying principals are not sufficiently well understood for me to form a real opinion concerning that (though I can see where many theories make sense). Other than the fact that baryogenesis had to occur and that if the universe was expanding as we expect it would necessitating multiple force interaction epochs, again, I do not have a firm opinion on how or the specifics of what occurred during this time period (first 10e-20 sec or so).

From that point forward, it is comparatively quite well understood and, as I stated, I agree with the scientific consensus here. I expect that as experiments continue we will gain a better understanding of force and particle interactions at these energies and be able to determine what happened during those earlier time frames with better confidence. This is very much an ongoing thing, and we have learned a staggering amount in the past decade. Particle accelerators are awesome.

Now, to answer your criticism "Since you throw God out of the picture, I thought you all would have a good solid answer for this"... NO. That's just scummy. The lack of an answer doesn't mean you insert God. The lack of an answer means you DO SCIENCE. You figure it out. You don't slap the God band-aid on your lack of knowledge.

And it's not that we "throw God out of the picture". That's broken/stupid Christian logic where you have faith in something therefore it must be valid for others. It's that there is absolutely ZERO reason to insert God into the picture in the first place. He's not there. Until evidence is present that points to the necessity of an all powerful God mucking about in our physics, he will remain not there.

There are many gaps in my knowledge. There is absolutely no reason to think that God occupies any of them. Just as there is no reason to think that 965.473 quadrillion ultra high density pink space unicorns coalesced into singularities all over the universe, and that's why we have black holes.
Disappointing, but fair enough. I thought you had some at least high level opinion of what the trigger might be.

As for all the insults that I knew you couldn't abstain from. You did said infinite amount of evidence on part of this topic. I wasn't trying to move the goalposts, I was trying to re-ask the question since no one would answer, unless you consider the trash I got as a real answer to any of these questions.
ScienceProves

London, KY

#102401 May 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Yet your bible and its claims seem just as cartoonish to us as Spiderman. You claim spiderman is imaginary, yet you cannot show any more evidence for your god than we can for spiderman.
You simply have not tried to believe in spiderman with all your heart. You have not tried to live the ways of spiderman.
This is what I hear when you make claims of god.
I think we need to work on discerning the differences of possessive pronouns to that of just regular proper noun usage with you (and others that make that same error repetitively)

You better notch it up a few levels-I get bored easily, especially even more so, in regard to comic book vomititus levels of stupid.

After that you lost me-as in "lalalala Whatttttuh(?)" cause I don't do ignorant, accusatory, issues of self projectionalization.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102402 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm really not trying to be a jerk, I'm asking you guys how it happened because you are telling me there is no God. So I'm just trying to find out how it happened without a God. Why can't you just answer the question instead of turning it on me? We've already talked about my beliefs. Why is everyone so defensive when I ask what you guys think?
First and again, I have made no claim their is no god. I highly doubt their is a god because their is zero evidence a god has ever existed.
Now do you doubt that rain might be due to the natural forces in our universe and without direction of a god because you do not have full evidence of just how rain could come to be?
I do not claim to be able to explain the extremely complex ways nature works. I am not a scientist.
And no one can as of yet really know how it all started, yet you sure make the claim to know, yet you cannot show.

In a nutshell, rain comes from evaporation and condensation. Science knows water exists in comets and other objects in space that came together due to gravity as the earth formed. At least this is what the evidence as of yet shows.

Now do you need to know more? Do you expect more in order to think god might not be involved with rain?
If so, then it is very understandable why you believe in a god. It is then very understandable why the ancients believed in the gods, as they have very little understanding of nature through science.
This is why gods like Zeus were attributed to rain.
This is why native Americans did rain dances. This is why human sacrifices were offered to the gods when drought came.

We know better now, or at least we should. Strangely people still pray for rain as if a god is going to change the laws of physics and nature to have it rain in a location that you wish for in certain amounts.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102403 May 4, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
I think we need to work on discerning the differences of possessive pronouns to that of just regular proper noun usage with you (and others that make that same error repetitively)
You better notch it up a few levels-I get bored easily, especially even more so, in regard to comic book vomititus levels of stupid.
After that you lost me-as in "lalalala Whatttttuh(?)" cause I don't do ignorant, accusatory, issues of self projectionalization.
Sorry if I am not on point with writing myth.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102404 May 4, 2013
ScienceProves wrote:
<quoted text>
Secular history per Maccabees, Herods..Antipator..Caliphs..Go dfrey..Sherifs.. etc? Bueller, Duke-etty...Simacovich...
(and plz do not compare the realistic secular histories of Judea to the mythical cartoonishness of Camelot. Thank you in advance.)
I will compare it because it shows to be no different. Now if you can show that I am wrong, go for it, but just claiming I am wrong is pointless in a debate.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

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

#102405 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, how is this?
How do you "think" solar systems were "formed", and from what, and what triggered it?
Did I use all the right words that time for you to actually answer the question instead of avoiding it?
Particles of matter with inertial mass were converted from the energy of the Quantum energy during the BB... All matter is connected to all other matter via the remaining energy the matter was converted out of.. Depending on the EM signature of particles some will tend to become close and phase lock together, some will be repelled to come close enough to phase lock with other particles and all exist in a inverse tensor field of the quantum state..

That is how basic matter self assembles into more complex molecules over time ...
http://b.pcc2.fubar.com/16/96/1186961/8570803...
http://b.pcc3.fubar.com/16/96/1186961/3048103...

Now once particles become more massive the inverse tensor produces the effect we call Gravity... the more massive particles tend to attract other massive particles and form a Texture to the Universe that would look a bit like the structure of a sponge.. it has threads of more dense regions and less dense regions.. http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/galform/millen...

When Enough matter is close the gravitational effect compresses the local matter into larger groups and at some point the gravitational force causes particle to become so pressed together they fuse and a star in born... That star causes the formation of even more complex forms of matter that are more and more massive..then at some point that star converts so much matter it collapses and tosses these more massive elements into space to again be drawn together and form another star.. as these start to form they are impacted by other large bodies and set to spinning by the kinetic forces... As the new forming star spins a disk of matter is pulled around it and the effect of gravity and electromagnetism cause the gas and material to form in specific areas dependent on the gravitational field of the star and the assorted gravitational fields of all other matter in the area... Forming planets......

Of course you can also capture a passing object and it may settle into a stable orbit... if matter happens to find itself in a position that is not stable over time it will fall into the star, other planets or be flung off into free space to be tugged at by the other trillions of gravitational effects and over time we end up with fairly stable solar systems, at least stable on a human time scale... On a Universal time scale none are stable as our solar system will fly apart and our sun will turn to a red giant and them explode tossing all the material than makes our planets into the cosmos to form new systems in the future...

Hope this helps....

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#102406 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Disappointing, but fair enough. I thought you had some at least high level opinion of what the trigger might be.
As for all the insults that I knew you couldn't abstain from. You did said infinite amount of evidence on part of this topic. I wasn't trying to move the goalposts, I was trying to re-ask the question since no one would answer, unless you consider the trash I got as a real answer to any of these questions.
You insult my intelligence, lie to me, or put words in my mouth, I insult you. So don't act like I'm a big meany and you're innocent. I NEVER said infinite amount of evidence, I already answered the EXACT question you asked, and you DID move the goalposts and ask a new question. Again, try reading. It's all there. I showed you exactly how you did it, too, and showed you exactly why God is not in this equation, yet you amazingly choose to ignore all that. You're just being a stupid child because I didn't say anything you could pounce on.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#102407 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't take it as demeaning. I'm able to put myself in the shoes of others, so in understand your stance.
You say it is sad that I don't think a creator needs a creator. I never said that. Remember, I'm the only guy on here that has said I think the Father would have to have a Father.
Well my father is named Joe, but you seem to claim many fathers and I just get confused as to what you even consider a father. Is Jesus your father? Is god the father of Jesus? Does that god have a father? If so, who is he and why has no one mentioned him? Does he have a father?
I keep hearing the religious ask why atheists do not think the universe needed no deity creator. Well with that logic, the creators must have needed creators and so on and so on. Thus the concept has no more basis in truth than any other.
Yet you acted as if we are forgoing logic to assume no creator deity was needed.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#102408 May 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus stands up and proclaims that he was foretold...and that is evidence to you? Psychics constantly make predictions then later claim they came true. Do you also accept their words?
That's a lot of BS.
That bit about Moses is also not pointing to Jesus as far as I can tell. It does not name Jesus in any way. There were prophets before Moses, and after. The point of that verse was that the Israelis heard the voice of God directly and it scared their wee pants off so they asked for God to speak through Moses. It is establishing the idea of prophets speaking for God. A nice trick that the various churches could later use to retain their power.
The Catholics built an empire upon it.
YOU WROTE
1)Jesus stands up and proclaims that he was foretold...and that is evidence to you?

That is a very simplistic way to state the events in question

On several occassions,Jesus stood before his adversaries and told them that the Scriptures testified of him.
Who were his adversaries?
They were the Pharisees,Saduccees,The Scribes and the Lawyers,supposedly well versed in Scriptures,yet,
none dared challenge the validity of his claim.
Why not?
They were familiar with his teachings and miracles. The validity of his teachings,when he accused them of having misinterpreted God's commandments,they were unable to refute.
They knew of his power,which he claimed from the Father.
They did not dispute his power,but refusing to believe,they attributed the source of his power as coming from the devil.
It,is not just that he claimed,it is the fact that,those who were in a position to invalidate his claims,were unable to do so.



2)Psychics constantly make predictions then later claim they came true. Do you also accept their words?

That is an absurd analogy. No similarity what so ever to the topic we are discussing

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#102409 May 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't assume I know nothing. Your assumptions about my lack of knowledge in science is an excuse to not answer the question apparently.
I am not assuming, I am going by what you post, which you post a clear lack of scientific knowledge.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#102410 May 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Well then just what is your stance? I assumed it was your stance because you argue against the points for gay marriage and your church is against gay marriage.

I hear the argument from the religious all the time that marriage is the path to monogamy. It is one of the few points I have an agreement with them on. Strange how we disagree on this.

One of my main gripes about religion is, they constantly push for laws based upon religious doctrine that has no basis of logic or other reasons. You have yet to show any reasons homosexuals should be denied the privilege of marriage. But it is no secret your church poured money into a campaign to not allow gay marriage (prop 8).

I like to discuss religion because it is an interesting topic, but what really drives a passion in me to talk about religion is when people try to make law based upon these superstitious beliefs.

So please keep this in mind as you wonder why I keep asking questions about your religion.
I really think most atheists would give you religious people less of a hassle if the religious stopped using the superstitious doctrine as a basis to make law.
I will gladly answer your question once you have answered mine.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Johnnie Mcgegor at csc 4 min Brenda 10
Roger Vanover trying to buy perscription medici... (May '12) 5 min Girl 40
KY What's mitch McConnell done for coal, when ther... 15 min well 1,338
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 18 min Blood Soaked Mallet 151,159
Kevin Disney Central Elementary School 55 min Parent 3
New club in Barbourville? 2 hr Tyler 45
joann gregory 2 hr grimes 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 ]
•••