Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 152026 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.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

Manchester, KY

#109837 Aug 6, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know. I'm not familiar with crustal shifts or megalithic alignments. Sounds cool though. I might Google that later.
All I know is Noah's Ark is a dumb...dumb...dumb story for a grown person to believe is real. Taking it as mythology, yes. That's what it is. But taking it as a literally true story is a hallmark of total bumf*cked ignorance. And it does a huge dis-service to the study of ancient literature. That's one of the reasons I get so pissed over the topic. These idiots want to inject their silly little god dreams into this literature, making it impossible for them to understand it for what it really is.
It poisons the topic. And how many millions of little kids learned the story in its most neutered and juvenile form?
I mean come on...what about the floating corpses of all the babies god murdered over the course of those 40 days? Where's the coloring books with that? Hah.
Well the Crustal Shift theory has been around a long time and was supported by Albert Einstein. It was first published by Charles Hapgood ... And today we see the magnetic pole moving faster and faster which may be the first indicator that the next shift is underway.. The basic idea is that the light crust of the planet floats on a liquid magma with a fast spining iron core... at some point the natural precession wobble of the planet and the density of the ice build up at the poles cause the whole crust of the earth to shift in one piece like the peel of an orange if the inside of the orange was liquid.. And it happens very quickly geologically speaking... the Magnetic field is a product of not only the Iron Cores rotation but of the magmas directional flow also.. so just before a crustal shift the magnetic poles would start to wander and eddy currents would form causing the earths magnetic field to distort... then Whack!.. the crust shifts in a matter of weeks to months with slits in the tectonic plates and massive earthquakes that would continue for decades if not centuries until the planet stabilized at it's new crustal position... In the last 100 years the Magnetic poles have sped up over a 10 fold and are now moving at over 40 miles a year.... a 100 years ago they were drifting at about 4 miles a year... Today our magnetic north pole is in the Arctic Ocean headed for Russia...

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109838 Aug 6, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, most people are very ignorant of dinosaurs, the science of the past eras, and the life forms that existed in the past. And if you have an honest question, I welcome them. But in case you are not aware, their is a large dispute going on here about the past between your team(creationists) and the science of the day. Thing is, you guys do not seem to understand much about the science, yet keep insisting it is not correct.
Now I see you are not as insistent as most others on your team here, but either way, you are promoting the faith based (cannot be known/zero evidence) view of creation.

In the times of the Jurassic extinction, vegetation was reduced greatly. So it stands to reason the large creatures would not easily flourish. It took millions of years before vegetation grew back to normal levels. By this time the smaller animals gained such a great advantage, large animals never had a good chance competitively. There is always a race for resources.
I see this as harmful to our society. It retards some from advancing in knowledge.
Just wanted to explain why my panties are in a wad.
Dinosaurs intrigue me. I studied them from youth through high school. I almost became an archaeologist out of sheer infatuation.
My questions are sincere. I have learned quite a bit more lately that a lot of what I learned as a youth has been found untrue and scientific opinions have changed on several topics. So I'm interested again.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109839 Aug 6, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, but the double standards of laws only shows me this is not a law of a perfect god, but of men who learn what is a better law due to the lessons of history.
Not that turning the cheek is the best way, but it might have deterred a few from killing someones baby for the crimes of the father.
Obviously our society does not turn the other cheek. And it does sometimes take an eye for an eye. So ironic it is typically Christians who are for the death penalty, often quoting an eye for an eye. How insanely ignorant of them.

Humans judge, and we must judge, in my opinion. If we did not judge, the criminals would run free and likely harm us. This is why America has laws, judges and punishments. Society cannot settle for the hope a god will do the judging.

People like King David should have been judged by man and punished by man. He should have been kept from power so as to help prevent future crimes of the nature he committed.

This does not mean I do not forgive people, but I do not do it automatically. I do not forgive someone just because they asked for forgiveness. Depending upon the transgression, I may see they need to be punished and or give some reparations. So some transgressions need earned forgiveness. One must build and earn the trust, not be handed trust no matter the past transgressions.
I answered about the higher and lesser laws a minute ago, so I'll skip that here for sake of unnecessary duplication. Please don't say I avoided it.

For judgment, I pointed out that Jesus said when we must judge, we are to do so in righteousness. I judge all the time, like who my kids should be allowed to be near, etc. I am fine with people being judged and sentenced according to the laws of our state or country. They are aware of the laws and should they choose to break them, they should realize there is a good chance they will have to deal with the consequence.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109840 Aug 6, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, you did not say faith was virtue, but you did say it was needed.

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
1. What if the creator, created the laws of science? And since He does not want to be "proven" because it disposes of the need for faith because it is contrary to His plan, couldn't He avoid being proven to ensure His plans are not foiled?

So please explain why the plans could be foiled if the god gave out a bit of evidence?
And if the stories of the bible are true, would they not be evidence giving of some sort? If so, did it spoil the plan?

Point is, I see no point in needing faith. It is not virtuous, nor needed in any way that I can see as good. You have not explained it as why it is good, or needed.
I see it as bad, and I explained extensively why. Now why cannot not explain as I do?
I have explained it to you.
There are two main reasons we are on this earth. We chose to follow God's plan before we came to continue our progression to become like Him someday in eternity. We had to:
1. Gain a physical body
2. Have our faith in Him tested while out of His presence.

Remember?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109841 Aug 6, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>OK, since you felt I didn't answer you the last time here's a more direct answer.

1. "What if the creator, created the laws of science? And since He does not want to be "proven" because it disposes of the need for faith because it is contrary to His plan, couldn't He avoid being proven to ensure His plans are not foiled?"

Sure. This is what would follow from that premise:

God would be a liar and a dickhead. He would fool us into thinking there is only nature, then, through vague and disupted old books, he would ask us to have faith in him. Those of us who value the sense of reason he obviously gave us would reject that idea. And, as the overwhelming consensus of Christian doctrine would have it, we would deep fry in a vat of hellfire.

Hilarious! Good one, god. You devil.

But seriously, it's a fallacious argument. It sets itself up as not falsifiable. It cannot be refuted, it cannot be demonstrated. It is not scientific or rational. There isn't even a good reason to reply to it, honestly. I could make a similar argument that fairies did the same thing and you couldn't possibly refute me.

It reminds me of the rarely used Creationist argument that the reason we find dinosaur bones is because god is testing our faith. It's not a very clever argument and it lacks even the most fundamental degree of evidence.

2. "Why would God not be perfect if He had a Father? Jesus was perfect and He had a Father."

Jesus got killed on a cross. That's imperfection right there.

You need to clarify what you mean by "perfection". What I mean is that if god had a father then god is not all powerful, as virtually ALL Christian doctrine says he is. There is no Christian doctrine that I am aware of that postulates a beginning for god. To do so necessarily means god is not perfect. A perfect being would not require an act of creation in order to exist.

If you think otherwise then you are very much in a tiny, tiny minority of Christian thinkers and you lose all possible claim to any "first cause" or "prime mover" arguments that most apologists latch onto as a fundamental tool for proving the existence of god.
1. I don't even know how to begin to get you out of that tar pit of thinking. Good luck with that.

2. I still don't see how God couldn't be perfect even if He had a Father. Jesus is perfect, though has a Father.

“I was born a poor, black child”

Since: Jan 07

that weren't no easy thing

#109842 Aug 7, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
.
I will say one thing for you (okay, two). You are one dedicated and loyal individual. Those are wonderful qualities to have, I hope you learn to let go one day and see how many people out there you REALLY could help just by being yourself.
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109843 Aug 7, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>This might seem ironic unless you understood the name given by science is metaphoric and not literal. You see, the Adam and Eve science is referring to are just the earliest ancestors yet found fossilized.
I can't simplify the context that was being referenced much more than it already was.

Do we need to step you BACKWARDS to an Ele Intro to photsynthesis or something?
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109844 Aug 7, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL you were in school 50 years? My statement was addressing the Public School System, if you were in school for 50 years, I highly doubt if you EVER witnessed it, you'd have the ability to recognize it! you dumb phuck hehehe. Now admit your mistake and go on your merry way! You were trying to paint me foolish; Seems it backfired on you Proven Science, Sista or as I like to reference you (the shemale)
You do a fine job painting your own self foolish, and quite IGNORANT as well. I see no need to add to those FACTS.

Don't you have ANYHTING better to than to froth vomitous ignorance onto others, out of nothing but sick in the head green envy, like some rabid dog?

I made NO mistake, Science STILL is UNable to explain the UKnown origins of the "Y" strands, and you are still mired in the muck of a MENTALcase ten year old level "what do yo' peepee look like" IGNORANCE.

Take a hike--skank nasty idiot level LOSER. Your ignorance is boringly juvenile and imbecilic, and of the animalisTicm realms of the proverbial sodom and gomorrahly DEPRAVED.
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109845 Aug 7, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
<quoted text>
Once Again, when you are faced with losing yet ANOTHER ARGUMENT, you fall back to your usual banter, that's typical of you, avoiding the direct questions, name calling, and looking more the fool with every post.
Toodles LOSER-I don't do idiotocracy loserTicness...and that's all you're spewing.
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109846 Aug 7, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps were talking past one another. Let me be very clear. If you read the story of Noah in its proper context, as a piece of ancient literature that may or may not be based on some nugget of reality (in other words: a myth), then we have no quarrel.
My quarrel is with people who read it as truth. And for them it does matter how many days it rained, how old Noah was, and how big the boat was. Because those things are clearly defined in the story. If we read it in that way, the literal way, it makes no sense and goes against all manner of reason, science, and history.
Clinging to such a reading is stupid, especially today when you can Google it and know more about the topic in 15 minutes than your grandparents would have learned in their entire lives (typically).
I'm not saying the story has absolutely no basis in reality. Flood happen ALL THE TIME. And we tell stories all the time. It would make sense that ancient floods would lead to ancient stories.
What I am saying, unequivocally and without stuttering, is that Noah's Ark is FICTION in every sense of the word. When I read a Spider-Man comic book it is set in a place called New York City. It has trains, cars, restaurants, and references to historical figures. It involves a vigilante. There have been vigilantes, and there is a New York City. Therefore Spider-Man has a grain of truth in it.
But if you think Spider-Man comics are real you are a nuthut. Just like people who think the Bible is based on reality.
"If you read the story of Noah in its proper context, as a piece of ancient literature..."

I have REPEATEDLY emphasized, that in my opinion, that is the ONLY way to read the book-most specifically and especially the dark age, barbaric sounding parts, "pre-Jesus" OT.

About on the level of as interesting in some parts as spiderman comics, excluding it's excellent applications in use when it comes to archeology and glimpses into world history, making it actually a little more real world worthy than make beleive Spider man comics...mostly because there's NO comparisons when it comes to make believe Spidey slinging spidey webs up a building, and oh say...The Temple Mount for example. NO comparison what-so-ever then..whole DIFFERENT category!!:-)
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109847 Aug 7, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I say that? On the contrary, I am one of the very few on here that has said the Bible is not without error.
Read more closely please. You are way off here.
And obviously, in a lot of other areas as well!!
Yes and Amen

Richmond, KY

#109848 Aug 7, 2013
Nox Aeterna wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you figure I lack morals? I'm a very moral person, you don't need religion to have morality. Religion actually has a negative effect on morality when you get down to it. It's moral and righteous to be tolerant of all people, but your religion teaches you to shun and hate homosexuals. It's moral to respect everyone's beliefs, whether you agree with them or not. Religion teaches you to respect other people's beliefs if they match up with your own, but to be intolerant of those with different views.
And, where do you get the idea that I "hump, kill, sit on my butt, take from the rich", etc? You know absolutely nothing about me, how can you presume to know anything at all about what I may or may not do? That sounds very judgmental, which is immoral, I might add.
While I won't deny that I hump, I'm strongly against violence in any form. So, I have to dispute that I kill, or that I have even hurt someone physically. Taking from the rich? First off, I'm not on welfare and never have been. Second, the rich don't pay taxes in this country, so even if I were on welfare it wouldn't effect them, it's the middle class that pays the lion's share of taxes. And, taking and never giving? When's the last time you did something for someone else just for the sake of being a decent human?
I've donated money to the Red Cross numerous times for disaster relief funds. After Katrina I went door to door locally to get donations, bought supplies such as water, blankets, and canned food, then drove those supplies in a rented U-Haul to New Orleans. Not once, but 4 times.
When have you ever done anything to help your fellow man? I imagine when the earthquake hit Japan you prayed for them and went about your business, while I gave them money. When the big tornadoes hit the midwest this past spring, again I bet you prayed while I donated money. After Katrina, again you most likely prayed, while I gave up my time and money to travel to New Orleans and actually make a difference. I also volunteer quite often at local soup kitchens to feed those who would otherwise go hungry.
Don't ever presume to be more moral or a better person than someone else simply because you believe in a story book and they don't. As I've just shown you, this particular atheist is a much better citizen than you're likely to be. While you sit in your pew and mumble I actually go out and make a difference.
Though I may not personally have a huge impact in the overall scheme of things, I know for a fact that that world is a better place because I am in it. Can you say the same?
Ok, so you give... Good, so do I!
But your wrong about hating Gays, as I used to live that life!
I thank Jesus every day for bringing me out of that evil life!
Being tolerant of evil... NO!
You might as well let people like Sandusky out, and do what they do, as there is no Difference! Evil is evil!
Yes... we do pray, but that is not all we do, as it is Christians that do more adoptions, How do you stand on the Abortion issue???
Yes, I lumped you with other liberals, that MIGHT have been wrong, but look at it...
You're on here posting Against our Creator, and just as lost, as the people I placed you with!
Sure... People suck in all venues... None Good, no not one!
The only difference is...
We've been saved, and WISH that for ALL mankind!
Yes and Amen

Richmond, KY

#109849 Aug 7, 2013
Nox Aeterna wrote:
<quoted text>
How is God talking to Moses irrefutable? Were you there? Is there a recording of it? Is a video of it on YouTube? It's 100% unproven, the only proof of it is a story in an ancient book.
And, "Israel" is not proving one thing from the Bible is real. The nation of Israel didn't exist until 1947, you know that, right? The name of a place that is real doesn't make the story real, no more than it would be real if I wrote a book about a sparkly vampire and set it in Forks, Oregon(real city, Twilight is real by your logic).
Read it!
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109850 Aug 7, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
No, please remember our previous conversations. The higher law, or priesthood, existed on earth for quite some time. And if you choose to remove Him from your life so you are not in His presence, then you should expect to not be in His presence after this life.
Ever read anything on the Mahcabees? I tried mentioning it before, but you see how quickly the content level drops to one half a rung level above a ghetto gutter grate sometimes here sometimes.
There's just SO much to read on the subject matter, it's understandable how people can and do, spend a lifetime studying such!!

Sample-
The first of these reasons appears to be urged by Christ Himself in Matthew 22:23; the second reminds one of the words of St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 15:19, and 2 Thessalonians 1:4. Besides urging the foregoing arguments, the Fathers appeal also to certain analogies found in revelation and in nature itself, e.g. Jonas in the whale's belly, the three children in the fiery furnace, Daniel in the lions' den, the carrying away of Henoch and Elias, the raising of the dead, the blossoming of Aaron's rod, the preservation of the garments of the Israelites in the desert, the grain of seed dying and springing up again, the egg, the season of the year, the succession of day and night. Many pictures of early Christian art express these analogies.....

These three characteristics, identity, entirety, and immortality, will be common to the risen bodies of the just and the wicked. But the bodies of the saints shall be distinguished by four transcendent endowments, often called "Qualities".

The first is "impassibility", which shall place them beyond the reach of pain and inconvenience. "It is sown", says the Apostle, "in corruption, it shall rise in incorruption" (1 Corinthians 15:42). The Schoolmen call this quality impassibility', not incorruption, so as to mark it as a peculiarity of the glorified body; the bodies of the damned will be incorruptible indeed, but not impassible; they shall be subject to heat and cold, and all manner of pain.
The next quality is "brightness", or "glory", by which the bodies of the saints shall shine like the sun. "It is sown in dishonour," says the Apostle, "it shall rise in glory" (1 Corinthians 15:43; cf. Matthew 13:43; 17:2; Philippians 3:21). All the bodies of the saints shall be equally impassible, but they shall be endowed with different degrees of glory. According to St. Paul: "One is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the glory of the stars. For star differeth from star in glory"'(1 Corinthians 15:41-42).
The third quality is that of "agility", by which the body shall be freed from its slowness of motion, and endowed with the capability of moving with the utmost facility and quickness wherever the soul pleases. The Apostle says: "It is sown in weakness, it shall rise in power" (1 Corinthians 15:43).
The fourth quality is "subtility", by which the body becomes subject to the absolute dominion of the soul. This is inferred from the words of the Apostle: "It is sown a natural body, it shall rise a spiritual body" (1 Corinthians 15:44). The body participates in the soul's more perfect and spiritual life to such an extent that it becomes itself like a spirit. We see this quality exemplified in the fact that Christ passed through material objects.

From: Maas, Anthony. "General Resurrection." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 12. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 7 Aug. 2013
SistaNoneYaBiz

London, KY

#109851 Aug 7, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Dinosaurs intrigue me. I studied them from youth through high school. I almost became an archaeologist out of sheer infatuation.
My questions are sincere. I have learned quite a bit more lately that a lot of what I learned as a youth has been found untrue and scientific opinions have changed on several topics. So I'm interested again.
This place has been around a LONG time.

http://www.dinosaurstatepark.org/index.htm ;
Interesting to visit on a Saturday afternoon, Church on Sundays.

REAL world BALANCE, morality (and other spiritual type) lessons of decency and ethics, NOT considered "evil" lol.
Mostof

London, KY

#109852 Aug 7, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I say that? On the contrary, I am one of the very few on here that has said the Bible is not without error.
Read more closely please. You are way off here.
those exhibiting shamelessly as being part of the plague cult of Satans tools of prepubescent, pedophilia like disease carriers, are at very least, "off" in the head. As in depraved and degenerate.

And should not be trusted.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#109853 Aug 7, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
<quoted text>
Honestly, Can't you pull out some new material from your little black magic bag? This same ole' same ole' is getting boring.(yawns)
Well,The fact that so many influential Atheists ended up in mental asylums should not bore you.
The fact that,according to studies,Unbelievers have more mental issues than believers,Your greatest political leaders were ruthless,inhumane murderers,Stalin,Ze Dong,PolPot,Mussolini and Hitler,,,Should not bore you.....It should give you reason for concern.....On the other hand,If I were an Atheist,I would not want to discuss those topics.....
BTW,,,Pardon E mois,,,I do not remember issuing an edict making it mandatory that what I post has to be read.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#109855 Aug 7, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So first you claim man could not produce life and this proves god is the creator. Now you see man can produce life to a certain extent, and thus you claim this proves their is a creator.
You see how you take anything and twist it to mean their must be a creator?
No one, including me, can know if a god created anything. But it is you who claims he must have. You have absolutely zero evidence to show he did, yet keep insisting he must have. This only makes you look to have little standards in claims. This is why I tend not to believe biblical claims.
Let me clear it up for you.
Atheists and science claim that Life and intelligence were created by some means,other than intelligent design,thereby denying God's role in our creation.
But science,in their search to create life,has resorted to using their intellect and ability to reason and plan in order to create the building blocks of life.
Now,they have accomplished that minor point,not by waiting around for it to happen,they created the method by which this result was accomplished..
What does that mean,or signify?
Even though they are nowhere near to achieving what they will probably never achieve,create life,what little they have achieved has been solely due to their Intelligent Design of that project,it did not happen by accident.
What they have confirmed is that,without intelligent design,they would have gotten nowhere.
So,we were created by an intelligence beyond our human understanding.
We did not evolve as a resultg of an unwitnessed accident that occurred in some mudhole at an unspecified time and place and for which there is no record to be found anywhere.....
Anyone claiming to have been born as a result of an accident,can blame their parents for not practicing birth control.
And I must repeat
The God I believe in is alive and well..Has,is and always will be....
Christ did for me, what I could never do for myself,pay for my sins and redeemed my soul...

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109856 Aug 7, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps were talking past one another. Let me be very clear. If you read the story of Noah in its proper context, as a piece of ancient literature that may or may not be based on some nugget of reality (in other words: a myth), then we have no quarrel.
My quarrel is with people who read it as truth. And for them it does matter how many days it rained, how old Noah was, and how big the boat was. Because those things are clearly defined in the story. If we read it in that way, the literal way, it makes no sense and goes against all manner of reason, science, and history.
Clinging to such a reading is stupid, especially today when you can Google it and know more about the topic in 15 minutes than your grandparents would have learned in their entire lives (typically).
I'm not saying the story has absolutely no basis in reality. Flood happen ALL THE TIME. And we tell stories all the time. It would make sense that ancient floods would lead to ancient stories.
What I am saying, unequivocally and without stuttering, is that Noah's Ark is FICTION in every sense of the word. When I read a Spider-Man comic book it is set in a place called New York City. It has trains, cars, restaurants, and references to historical figures. It involves a vigilante. There have been vigilantes, and there is a New York City. Therefore Spider-Man has a grain of truth in it.
But if you think Spider-Man comics are real you are a nuthut. Just like people who think the Bible is based on reality.
Might I add, due to the fantastic claims that are surely not true, I conclude the god claims of why their was a flood are also myth.
Oh so typical of people to attribute natural disasters to god, yet they somehow think he is so loving as their loved ones die or lose all their belongings to said disaster.
who

Charleston, SC

#109857 Aug 7, 2013
would think this would be a good idea enough crazies in the world

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
Education 40 min Girls 23
Grand Jury indicts Dexter Smith for perjury 1 hr Wondering 30
Whatever happened to the Eye Dr. Gregory? 2 hr lol 16
house cleaner wanted 2 hr justin 9
save a lot 2 hr Right 8
Free Trump signs tonite at 600 courthouse !! 2 hr Republican Party 1
Breeze 6 hr Hiphiphooray 3

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages