Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 157857 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.

SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109423 Aug 1, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>Let's use your Logic when we ask about transitional fossils... shall we?
(Just because you haven't found any... doesn't mean there aren't any!)
I would say... Everest was under water, and only grew after the waters subsided, all the smaller critters drowned quickly, and mankind fought hard to survive, climbing trees, hills, grabbed boats, and logs, and maybe floated for days!
We've found ruins, with dead peoples bones scattered all over, and artifacts found in coal layers dated by shady means to say they're older than they are!
Genesis 6 is the story of Noah... read it!
We are far worse today... we all deserve punishment!
Thank God for Jesus!
How far beyond the realms of their own habitats, do you think the tribe of Noah was able to write about seeing?
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109424 Aug 1, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>Well...
at least you believe Jesus was real...
Remember that Name, as it Is the Only Name
by which one can be saved!
Duquette is a master at words trolling out both sides of his mouth lol.
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109425 Aug 1, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>Read it slowly this time!
"Scientists determined that the chicken had to come first,
because only a chicken can lay a chicken egg"
Now... did that chicken have to wait LONG before finding a mate???
No... the was another chicken at the Time of creation...
Go figure!
Look up morphological coral species and plankton sometime YaA--as in study BEYOND(!!!!) that antiquated, limited theory of apeology for ele-mental levels by Derwood the botonist!
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109426 Aug 1, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>Amen! God Bless you :-)
Thank you-I DO appreciate the kind sentiment..and the aame to you as well :-)!
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109427 Aug 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Territories like Cuba, Jamaica and the Bahamas? Then there's Russia in the opposite direction. Attu Island is closer to it than to mainland Alaska.
Yes, so does that mean islands are "countries", or just "territories"?
ProvenScience

London, KY

#109429 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. Popular consensus means nothing on most topics outside of opinion
I disagree, because Statistics are more often based on gathered FACTS, rather than "popular polling choices" of mere opinion.

There is a HUGE difference, ESPECIALLY in areas like SCIENCE.

Since: Apr 13

Scappoose, Oregon USA

#109430 Aug 1, 2013
Seriously, I don't think "religion" of any type should be taught in the public schools, for one thing it opens the dangerous door to Islam insisting they also teach the Koran! No, I think school should be for teaching "the 3R's" and all face/religion should be taught at home, in church services, or standing naked on a mountaintop with your friends to greet the sunrise which God hath made! Weather permitting, of course [grins]

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#109433 Aug 1, 2013
SistaNoneYaBiz wrote:
<quoted text>
Translated: Duhmmy got called out on it's countries vs territories remark.
HA!
(PS: I'll be sure NOT to call the proctologist that did yours!!)
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/campbellsvill...

Care for some ketchup with that crow?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#109435 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. Popular consensus means nothing on most topics outside of opinion
Translation:
Still pouting that Bishop Romney didn't win.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109436 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>Read Gould's "Bully for Brontosaurus". Something similar happened with Pluto's status as a planet.

That's the self-correcting nature of science at work. Mistakes happen. Also, since the idea of species is kinda fuzzy, it also reveals that nature is on a continuum. And that's hard to grasp for a lot of people.
Yeah I get it, just makes me sad for Brontosaurus and for Pluto. Haha

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

London, KY

#109437 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no Brontosaurus. Some archaeologist screwed up years ago and put the wrong head on an Apatasaurus. Learned that recently. Made me mad. That was one of my favorites as a kid.
I know, but was the first thing that popped into my head... And it really does not matter to the argument... We have found only a fraction of a percent of the variations in life that flourished 200 million years of the age of dino's... We have given the over broad title of Dinosaur to a whole plethora of animals from that period when what roamed the planet were as varied, if not more so, than the variations of today... There were warm, lukewarm and cold bloodied, lumbering, walking, running, and flying variations... And they Slowly evolved because the environments were stable or slowly changing until a big rock smacked us 65 million years ago and the Environment drastically changed and most life wiped... This open new places with less big guys to eat the little guys and more, different foods to try and evolution goes into high gear until all the critters fill and fit the new norm... Just like Evolution predicts would happen and is happening as we speak....

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109439 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>In that example we already know that kinetic balls are human-made objects. It's the watchmaker fallacy.

But we do not know that universes or life is made by any intelligence because we have no evidence of it nor any experience with other examples of things like universes and life being made by a mind.

So the default position, the null hypothesis, is that these things came about through natural forces. And until strong and abundant evidence comes to light that says otherwise it will remain the default, rational position to take.

Naturalism is rational. Supernaturalism is irrational. This is by definition and necessity.
It's all about scope. In my example, there would be some that did not know someone made the toy.

Who says the watchmaker is a fallacy? Things work together too complex to have happened by chance. The way the human body works, the solar system, rain, seasons, foliage, all these things work together very well, by chance?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109440 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>The first sentence is very true. And there are many actual scientists who are hard atheists and will use language such as "there is no god". When you have a hypothesis for which no evidence exists and all evidence points to a different conclusion it is really easy to simply use that kind of language. I've used it myself. I've said "there is no god" on many occasions. And I'm probably right.

Your second sentence is true, but with some caveats. On the purest philosophical level you are absolutely correct. Science cannot prove or disprove god...right now. Not with our current tools and level of understanding. But if god exists IN the universe at all then he is within the realm of science and can certainly be shown to exist or be shown to the highest possible philosophical degree to not exist.

The trick is when you place your god outside the universe. If you say he is eternal and transcendent then suddenly he cannot be proven or disprove by science. That is by definition supernatural, outside any possible scope of natural inquiry.

But here's an important caveat. The more specific a god, the easier it is to dismiss. The Christian god in particular is very easy to dismiss because so many specific claims are made that can be looked at scientifically or rationally. For example, the Bible makes a lot of historical claims that are not true. There never seems to have been an exodus, for example.

The god of the Bible is morally inconsistent. It is claimed that he is omnipotent and all loving. Well, given the fact that babies are often tortured and killed, that claim cannot possibly be true.

Jesus is said to have been dead for days then rose again. We have no reliable record of anyone being dead for days then coming back to life. So that's a strike against this god being real.

Stuff like that.
Your examples only mean that we don't have scientific evidence to support these claims. It doesn't mean it didn't or couldn't happen. It doesn't even mean it isn't probable. If I am right in the things I have said, this is on purpose. We are here to test our faith and receive a physical body to continue our progression. With proof, there is no room for faith, so this important part of our earthly existence would be wasted.
Confused

Owingsville, KY

#109441 Aug 1, 2013
What is this thread doing with over 100,000 posts?
You can not convince the ignorant any differently. If they want to worship a turd and stab their neighbors in the back in the name of a god, that will be normal for them. They believe they are superior and are helping anyone that even questions anything they say. A fine example is the creation museum has dinosaurs living at the same time man did. There were a few million years between them. What fools these mortals be. I am just amazed people still believe fairtales,talking in tongues and silly child games as such. It is your place to prove the implausible not mine to prove it isn't there. If your god is so mighy can he make a rock he can not move... NO!
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#109442 Aug 1, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just idiotic.......
To those with idiotic tendencies,that would appear to be idiotic.
To those of us who have experienced the power of God and Christ it is the power of God and Christ.
The misguided opinions of unbelievers will in no way have an adverse impact on what we believe to be true...
Our faith remains strong and undeterred.
Our God lives.....

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109443 Aug 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Translation:
Still pouting that Bishop Romney didn't win.
Ha. Something like that. Let me guess: you're an Obama fan?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109444 Aug 1, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>I know, but was the first thing that popped into my head... And it really does not matter to the argument... We have found only a fraction of a percent of the variations in life that flourished 200 million years of the age of dino's... We have given the over broad title of Dinosaur to a whole plethora of animals from that period when what roamed the planet were as varied, if not more so, than the variations of today... There were warm, lukewarm and cold bloodied, lumbering, walking, running, and flying variations... And they Slowly evolved because the environments were stable or slowly changing until a big rock smacked us 65 million years ago and the Environment drastically changed and most life wiped... This open new places with less big guys to eat the little guys and more, different foods to try and evolution goes into high gear until all the critters fill and fit the new norm... Just like Evolution predicts would happen and is happening as we speak....
Wonder why organisms didn't evolve into dinosaurs again?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109445 Aug 1, 2013
Confused wrote:
What is this thread doing with over 100,000 posts?
You can not convince the ignorant any differently. If they want to worship a turd and stab their neighbors in the back in the name of a god, that will be normal for them. They believe they are superior and are helping anyone that even questions anything they say. A fine example is the creation museum has dinosaurs living at the same time man did. There were a few million years between them. What fools these mortals be. I am just amazed people still believe fairtales,talking in tongues and silly child games as such. It is your place to prove the implausible not mine to prove it isn't there. If your god is so mighy can he make a rock he can not move... NO!
And this from someone that does not see themselves as superior, I assume?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109447 Aug 1, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Naaah,Those are the symptoms experienced by an Atheist when they consume the contents of their stills...
Yiagio can tell you about that.
He has confessed to ingesting bad liquor while watching movies with his friends.
And yes,,,,Birds evolved from dinosaurs;
It's fashionable today to claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs, although again, there is little agreement on which dinosaur lineage was ancestral to birds. The claim persists in spite of the fact that birds and dinosaurs differ markedly. Legs must become wings and scales must become feathers. Dinosaurs had solid bones, yet bird bones are hollow. Reptilian dinosaurs were likely cold blooded while birds are warm blooded with an extremely high metabolism. Dinosaurs had lungs similar to mammals, while the bird's breathing scheme is totally different. At least dinosaur eggs were similar to birds eggs
Any birdbrain can attest to that inane opinion
Necessity is the mother of invention and there are those who need to invent the unbelievable in order to justify the ludicrous
When animals evolve, they do not stay the same, so the changes are just what evolution would be about. So when you cite changes as if they could not happen, it seems strange. And the arms become the wings, not the legs.
There is a lot of similarities between dinosaurs and birds, not just eggs. If you studied this you would know. Scientists study this and they know. Scientists are not birdbrained.
For example, the bone structure of a T-rex is almost identical to birds, other than the arm being a wing.
I get it, you call this coincidence, but science sees way more coincidences than you because they study this and you study the bible. So the overwhelming number of similarities show science this is more than just coincidence.
And when fossils are found that show tails and heads of dinosaurs yet have wings, the similarities tie together.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#109448 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha. Something like that. Let me guess: you're an Obama fan?
Wash your mouth out. Just because 2+2 doesn't equal 5 doesn't mean it equals 6.

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
Martha and randy 22 min Yea 7
That was fast 23 min True 1
Grey, ky 40 min Asphalt sealer 23
Knox st Liquor Going Broke ! 41 min well 5
Cobb-Hampton Funeral Home 8 hr dead man walking 4
I hate you 9 hr Sour 25
Who's the girl ?? 9 hr Inquiring Mind 3
How to make homemade ice melt for steps, sidewa... (Jan '13) Sat Carol 110

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages