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 (Page 5,021)

Showing posts 100,401 - 100,420 of122,515
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104997
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Many new traits are thought to come about quickly. This the likelihood of a transition fossil like this is very low. But their are fish with fins that look and work like legs in a transition like state.
Kinda like Coelacanth??? The great missing link thought to be extinct millions of years ago? This was the fish pointed to as the link to the first land dwelling creatures only to show up alive and well in 1938... And guess what? No legs!!! Lol... Boy you're a sharp one!!
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104998
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

GWB wrote:
<quoted text>Bible approves of the raping of female children to produce offspring. The females who are not virgins are put to death. Why? Does your God approve of pedophiles?
Numbers 31:7-18
Ask him...
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104999
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Incorrect, most fossil renderings require much more than a tooth, which is why the "Nebraska Man" was quickly discarded as fake.
Nebraska man was hailed around the world as the great missing link... Museums around the world set up displays!!!.... Still scraping the egg off their faces on that one...
Lie much?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105000
May 28, 2013
 
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose from a practical perspective there's not much difference between the two (deism and atheism), but I think it's more than semantics. Deism supports the existence of a supernatural deity and that itself is antithetical to atheism. Whether the supposed deity is actively involved with our existence is a bit tangential. Deism is still superstitious thinking.
Not entirely, deists do not consider a god to be a tangible concept, but simply something "more" than the universe. They make no assumptions on the nature of this "god," and thus it is not the same as theism. They give this "god" no traits other than being "more" than, and thus there are no superstitions either. The way I would describe it is that deists simply state "something started it all in motion, we don't know what that was, so we'll just call it a god." This is often why deists are almost always agnostic, eventually, they cannot say what it was so they do not assert it's fact.

Fascinating topic though, a nice diversion to the annoyance of creationists. I find deists to be very intelligent people more often than theists as well, they also think more deeply on matters than even some atheists. Another good explanation of a deist is an atheist with existentialism. ;)

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105001
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So because the religion you were raised in(Christianity) claims Jesus was infallible, that proves Islam as false?
I asked YOU what he said Jesus looks like. Again you refuse to answer a simple question.
I have already forgotten who it is that made the claim, and I am not going to search for the post.
Since I believe in the divine nature of Jesus Christ, yes, that would make Islam false.

Joseph described what Christ looked like in a couple of different places. When He visited the Kirtland temple, Joseph said this:

1 The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened.
2 We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber.
3 His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying:
4 I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105002
May 28, 2013
 
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Kinda like Coelacanth??? The great missing link thought to be extinct millions of years ago? This was the fish pointed to as the link to the first land dwelling creatures only to show up alive and well in 1938... And guess what? No legs!!! Lol... Boy you're a sharp one!!
Who ever said a species would be a mixture of two variations? That would be the creationists. The coelacanth is an intermediate species, the fins are more substantiated than other species, that is why they are intermediate between sea and land animals.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105003
May 28, 2013
 
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>You claimed it was in the bible, now you say it just infers.
It stands to reason if Jesus was a real deity, and only women could receive revelation worthy of passing on to other members, he would have mentioned it in the bible.
As I said, it's more than inference. Look at the example He set up. 12 apostles. All male. Quorum of 70. All male.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105004
May 28, 2013
 
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Outside the scope of what evolution explains? Horse hokey!!!
Reproduction us the very heart ToE...
Where, in the theory does it explain (or attempt to explain) how reproduction originated?
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again that is not a origin of life question... You simply cannot answer it so why resort to dodging and just admit you don't know... It's ok..
Oh but, it is. The fact that you can't seem to grasp that is getting tiresome. Replication, and how it originated, is part of the origin of life question. And that is outside the scope of what evolution explains. I'm sorry that bothers you so much, but I can't help it. It is what it is.

I, unlike you, am not dodging anything. I don't know how life originated. I don't know how reproduction originated. And these things have absolutely no effect on the validity of the theory of evolution.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution claims change over time and I'm asking where the information for benefit of species comes from?
Capisce?
No, I really don't understand what you're asking here.

You still have not answered (or even attempted to answer) my question to you. How does any of your argument supply evidence for Intelligent Design?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105005
May 28, 2013
 
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Do you guys ever test the claims of this?

71 And if any man shall administer apoison unto them it shall not hurt them;
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc...
It is either real or it is of myth.

2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the arestoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his bprophets, and for the cgathering of his dsaints to stand upon eMount Zion, which shall be the city of fNew Jerusalem.

3 Which city shall be abuilt, beginning at the btemple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and cdedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.

4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city aNew Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which btemple shall be creared in this dgeneration.

5 For verily this generation shall not all apass away until an bhouse shall be built unto the Lord, and a ccloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the dglory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.

Missouri? Really?
No, because of what is said two verses later, we do not test this.

What's wrong with Missouri?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105006
May 28, 2013
 
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said, it's more than inference. Look at the example He set up. 12 apostles. All male. Quorum of 70. All male.
Or so it was written by Constantine's All Male Revue.

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105007
May 28, 2013
 
*sigh*
Monkey unmensch does not even know what a "theory" is.
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105008
May 28, 2013
 
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>Where, in the theory does it explain (or attempt to explain) how reproduction originated?

defender wrote, "<quoted text>
Once again that is not a origin of life question... You simply cannot answer it so why resort to dodging and just admit you don't know... It's ok..
"

Oh but, it is. The fact that you can't seem to grasp that is getting tiresome. Replication, and how it originated, is part of the origin of life question. And that is outside the scope of what evolution explains. I'm sorry that bothers you so much, but I can't help it. It is what it is.

I, unlike you, am not dodging anything. I don't know how life originated. I don't know how reproduction originated. And these things have absolutely no effect on the validity of the theory of evolution.

defender wrote, "<quoted text>
Evolution claims change over time and I'm asking where the information for benefit of species comes from?
Capisce?"

No, I really don't understand what you're asking here.

You still have not answered (or even attempted to answer) my question to you. How does any of your argument supply evidence for Intelligent Design?
This question is only a starting point.. And thank you for finally admitting that you don't know... I'm trying to show you that reproduction is a working system and pattern of design that cannot work by means of random mechanics as it is far to complex... Once again it's self evident ...

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105009
May 28, 2013
 
Great, another I'er has shown up, double your pleasure double your fun.
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105010
May 28, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Who ever said a species would be a mixture of two variations? That would be the creationists. The coelacanth is an intermediate species, the fins are more substantiated than other species, that is why they are intermediate between sea and land animals.
Honey let the men debate if you can't do any better than that... Pshh..

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105011
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask him...
YaA might say "Great answer!" But then, it's the crazies and religious freaks who claim the voices in their heads are "God."
Any rational parent should be a little more cautious about leaving their daughter alone with a guy whose excuse might be "It's in the Bible. Here's 52 sheckles, keep the change." or "God told me to."

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105012
May 28, 2013
 
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
This question is only a starting point.. And thank you for finally admitting that you don't know... I'm trying to show you that reproduction is a working system and pattern of design that cannot work by means of random mechanics as it is far to complex... Once again it's self evident ...
What is self evident? It's too complicated to have happened on it's own so a god must have designed it? That's your scientific evidence? I remind you that you started this exchange by making the statement that science is now pointing to Intelligent Design and not Evolution. So this is your first piece of evidence?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105013
May 28, 2013
 
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
This question is only a starting point.. And thank you for finally admitting that you don't know... I'm trying to show you that reproduction is a working system and pattern of design that cannot work by means of random mechanics as it is far to complex... Once again it's self evident ...
"Self evident?"
In other words, this is just ONE MORE thing you have no clue about how, what, when, why or where, so there is no reason for you or anyone else to think about it, much less seek and provide real answers because "It's complicated, so God did it."

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105014
May 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again we get the angry rant... Ya know for a theory with so much evidence it sure it hard to get to see any of it... Lol... No need to get so pissed...
That's not "pissed", you stupid monkey. I don't get pissed on here because all of you are insignificant, and though you certainly make the world a worse place, there are others with far more influence doing the same.
The thing you quoted was simply showing exactly why nobody takes you seriously. I don't think anyone feels like arguing against long disproven stupid garbage that you regurgitate from fundie websites. If you want to debate, first demonstrate that you have a scientific theory to enter into the discussion (as I've requested multiple times thus far). And learn not to put 3000 elipses in your posts. Otherwise, we will all assume that you don't have one, that you are a stupid with stupid opinions, and that we are perfectly objective in continuing to have views consistent with reality without bothering to consider yours.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Outside the scope of what evolution explains? Horse hokey!!! Reproduction us the very heart ToE... Once again that is not a origin of life question... You simply cannot answer it so why resort to dodging and just admit you don't know... It's ok..
Evolution claims change over time and I'm asking where the information for benefit of species comes from?
Capisce?
Your question is invalid, and your lack of knowledge on the subject would be removed if you'd simply learn about evolution. Nobody is going to respond to your stupidity until you can prove that your views were generated by science and not religion.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
No they take partial fossils and paint what they wish with no way of knowing... Nebraska Man was a prime example of this ( pigs tooth )
But hey if it makes you sleep better than fine...
It's actually a fine example of how science always works. Almost a century ago, it was not generally accepted by the community, it was retracted after like 5 years once further evidence was found, and we now know what animal the fossil came from. Science worked flawlessly in the end. And despite you cherry picking an insignificant handful of times when it reached wrong conclusions for some short period when performed incorrectly, there are millions upon millions of times that it is right and the results still stand. You're stupid.

Show me how intelligent design is a product of science, moron. You keep saying it. Show me. And further, if you're going to ask stupid questions about evolution, show the part of the theory of evolution that you are attempting to refute. 90% of your arguments are against strawmen thus far.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
This question is only a starting point.. And thank you for finally admitting that you don't know... I'm trying to show you that reproduction is a working system and pattern of design that cannot work by means of random mechanics as it is far to complex... Once again it's self evident ...
Evolution does not address starting points and never has, you dunce. Nobody has NOT "admitted" such a thing, it's just not a part of the discussion and is irrelevant. Your argument is one from incredulity (as "cannot work" and "far to (sic) complex" are NOT fact, just a representation of what you don't understand). That's a fallacy. A completely invalid argument. A perversion of logic. And, as always "since I don't understand evolution, this other thing seems obvious to me" is NOT the same as "self evident".
defender

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105015
May 28, 2013
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>YaA might say "Great answer!" But then, it's the crazies and religious freaks who claim the voices in their heads are "God."
Any rational parent should be a little more cautious about leaving their daughter alone with a guy whose excuse might be "It's in the Bible. Here's 52 sheckles, keep the change." or "God told me to."
Good grief...

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105016
May 28, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Not entirely, deists do not consider a god to be a tangible concept, but simply something "more" than the universe. They make no assumptions on the nature of this "god," and thus it is not the same as theism. They give this "god" no traits other than being "more" than, and thus there are no superstitions either. The way I would describe it is that deists simply state "something started it all in motion, we don't know what that was, so we'll just call it a god." This is often why deists are almost always agnostic, eventually, they cannot say what it was so they do not assert it's fact.
Fair enough. For a brief period I flirted with the concept of Pantheism. I felt like I needed to be more "spritual" and I, like most people, am overcome with awe by nature at times. But then I reverted back to my typical skeptical self. I'm feeling much better now ;-)

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 100,401 - 100,420 of122,515
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

29 Users are viewing the Barbourville Forum right now

Search the Barbourville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
KY Hundreds of birds die in western Ky. (Jan '11) 3 min Mississippi Man 81,183
KY 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 14 min Jay 138,304
Is Paul Baker a good Disability Lawyer? (Dec '12) 1 hr Question 70
Larry dye and Amy dye 1 hr Just me 13
Melissa Collett (May '12) 2 hr hot mama 41
mike baker for jailer 2 hr Games 3
lamon jones 2 hr eye witness 4
Eight arrested in Knox drug roundup... 5 hr your screwed 9
•••

Freeze Warning for Knox County was issued at April 15 at 9:40PM EDT

•••
•••
•••
•••

Barbourville Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••