Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 163201 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.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111318 Aug 22, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Google "cognitive dissonance".
I think you are the smartest theist that posts on here, maybe that's why I keep arguing with you. Plus I'm interested in Christian sects such as the LDS. I like critiquing them.
Yeah, a person can be Vulcan in their logic but still be as silly as a little boy when it comes to religion. And you know, I don't have a problem with that privately. But if we're going to discuss the matter openly then I will not withhold my full opinion. I do not respect your beliefs because they are irrational. I don't care how logical you are in your daily life, you are irrational in your spiritual life.
As an example, you became a Mormon as an adult.
I think some are just not allowing some information to be looked at logically. So it is more of a denial issue than a lack of logic issue. Note how Du what keeps avoiding the meat of most issues. He sticks to the surface where the denial is safe. Once you pry deep into the issue, he runs and claims we are persecuting him.
This is Sista's excuse also.
YaA just runs and starts ranting about something else or starts quoting his preacher.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111319 Aug 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
You know that this phrase offends millions of people. It's like the n word to blacks is offensive, insensitive, and inappropriate.
So why use it to people that you know find it offensive unless you are just trying to provoke or insult?
Why? Many (if not most) of those millions of people convey the EXACT same sentiments all of the time. Do you equate the same level of offense to "Atheists are fools", "so and so/such and such is an abomination to God" and "God is love"? I do - because all three are deliberate utter and complete lies. In the real world God and damn are just two words one in front of the other. You don't have the power to make your god bless or damn anyone or anything "he doesn't want to."
So Gol dangit, then. Grow up - or is that phrase offensive, too?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#111320 Aug 22, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
"labelduhm"? You mean like curious does with the dreaded =gasp= ATHEISTS?=gasp=(genuflect, genuflect)
Atheism’s Motives
Atheism arises out of human rebellion. After citing the arrogant claim,“There is no God”(Psalm 14:1), the psalmist provides the motive behind the infidelity:“they are corrupt, they have done abominable works. There is none that does good”(see 14:2ff).

Derek Kidner has well noted:

“The assertion,‘There is no God,’ is in fact treated in Scripture not as a sincere if misguided conviction, but as an irresponsible gesture of defiance. In the context of Psalm 10:4 it is expounded as a gamble against moral sanctions; in Job 21:7-15 as impatience of authority; in Romans 1:18ff. as intellectual and moral suicide”(1973, 79).

This base disposition may be illustrated amply from a sampling of modern atheistic writings. Bertrand Russell - who affirmed:“I see no reason … to believe in any sort of God”- subsequently wrote:“Outside human desires there is no moral standard”(1957, 33, 62).

Atheist philosopher Jean Paul Sartre declared:“Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist.” He further stated that without God there are no “values” that can “legitimize our behavior”(1961, 485). He went so far as to affirm:“We can never do evil”(1966, 279).

In his popular book, The Meaning of Evolution, the late Professor George G. Simpson of Harvard, a militant opponent of Christianity, sought to find some rationale for morality. In a chapter titled,“The Ethics of Knowledge and of Responsibility,” Simpson revealed more than he intended when he declared:“Man has risen, not fallen”(emphasis added).

Supposedly, then, humanity is free to evolve its own code of ethics; Simpson denied there is any “absolute ethical criterion” to which men need to yield (1949, 309ff). Man is his own god!

It is hardly difficult to see the self-centered motive that underlies the creed of atheism.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111321 Aug 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
<quoted text>I have a trivia question for anyone who wants to answer... What is the only body part that cannot heal itself? Don't google the answer, just see if you can guess it...I guessed the second most popular answer, but it was wrong.
Heart?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111322 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
Ohhhohhhhh...
Bullchit Duquette-your BULLCHIT sometimes FRACTURES the realms of having ANY common decency and/or morality.
Maybe you should re-examine some of your OWN FLAWS and UNidealogies-and lay off of everyone else's for awhile-especially those who truly are NOT harming anyone else...because You are NO more entitled to some deviant delusional "utopia" than anyone else-ESPECIALLY at the expense of anyone else!
You DOG.
You keep in denial of harming anyone else. These are the most dangerous sorts.
I know perfect equality cannot exist, but lets just try for some basic equality for now.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111323 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
Ohhhohhhhh...
Bullchit Duquette-your BULLCHIT sometimes FRACTURES the realms of having ANY common decency and/or morality.
Maybe you should re-examine some of your OWN FLAWS and UNidealogies-and lay off of everyone else's for awhile-especially those who truly are NOT harming anyone else...because You are NO more entitled to some deviant delusional "utopia" than anyone else-ESPECIALLY at the expense of anyone else!
You DOG.
I note you avoided actually disputing what I said.

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Well technically, rape and cheating came long before porn. Just ask King David.
From what I understand, countries that have legal prostitution have lower percentages of rape. Both may be of an evil, so to speak, but the lesser evil might just be overall better for a civil society.
Utopia cannot exist.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111324 Aug 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you think my beliefs are irrational doesn't mean that they are. And since you have already judged me based off of the decision I made to join this church, then you automatically assume you are smarter than me and therefore become arrogant in your posts towards me.
I don't work well with arrogance. So if you really want to know my deepest beliefs and thoughts and see me throw them out on the table for you to dissect, then come down the arrogance ladder a few rungs. Understand what offends believers and back off of it.
I don't mind having respectful discussions about my beliefs. It's my favorite topic. But the profanity, GD's, and insults prevent a respectful discussion.
Just sayin
Just because your beliefs ARE irrational means that they are.

Your deepest beliefs led you to the decision to join that church. What else does anyone need to know about intelligence and arrogance?
Just sayin'

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#111325 Aug 22, 2013
“Thou shalt not believe in causation.”
Atheism’s creed flies in the face of the fundamental law of science—the law of causation. One writer, James Gillis, expressed it quaintly.

“Only in Atheism does the spring rise higher than the source, the effect exists without the cause, life comes from a stone, blood from a turnip, a silk purse from a sow’s ear, and a Beethoven Symphony from a kitten’s walk across the keys.”

In logic there is a maxim which affirms that “every effect must have an adequate cause.” Since the Universe exists, the question that challenges the thinking person is this: What was the “cause?” Whence came the “matter” of which the Universe is constituted? The philosophy of unbelief has suggested two possibilities.

The Universe is eternal.

The idea that the Universe has always existed is out of vogue today—even with most skeptics. Robert Jastrow, a professed agnostic, has argued (upon the basis of scientific data, e.g., the Second Law of Thermodynamics) that “modern science denies an eternal existence to the Universe, either in the past or in the future”(1977, 15).

The Universe created itself from nothing!

Others have postulated that the Universe created itself from nothing. Professor Victor Stenger described it in this way:“[T]he universe is probably the result of a random quantum fluctuation in a spaceless, timeless void.”(1987, 26-27).

That meaningless assemblage of words is the nearest thing to a literary “black hole” one could imagine (so dense, no light can escape).

First, if there was ever a time when nothing existed, nothing would exist today—for nothing produces nothing but nothingness!

Second, there are no scientific data that indicates matter has the ability to create itself. If such were the case, there ought to be some evidence of it; but the First Law of Thermodynamics argues that no matter is being created. Logically, then, one is driven to the conclusion that the Universe had a non-material commencement. But atheism casts logic aside and opts for a self-serving superstition.

“Thou shalt not observe order or design.”
Atheism cannot explain the order or design that is characteristic of our Universe.

Note that the very term, Uni -verse, suggests a mechanism of unity. The ancient Greeks called the Universe kosmos, which conveyed the basic meaning of “arrangement” or “order,” because they observed that the “world” was characterized by order.

The heavens are regulated by “ordinances”(cf. Job 38:33; Jeremiah 31:35). It hardly seems reasonable that this structured adornment is the result of a gigantic explosion (the mythical “big bang”), and yet that is precisely what skeptics believe.

If the Universe is characterized by design, it must have had a Designer, for it is a fundamental premise of “critical thinking” that design demands a designer.

Atheist professor Paul Ricci has conceded that if the Universe reveals “design,” there must have been a designer (1986, 190). Elsewhere I have argued the case for the “design” of the Universe in greater detail (Jackson, 2000).

The human body, with its integrated systems, e.g., bones, muscles, nerves, circulation, digestion, etc., eloquently testifies that the human being has been “fearfully and wonderfully made”(Psalm 139:14).

Dr. William Beck, a skeptical professor at Harvard, authored a textbook on physiology which he called Human Design (1971). The title conceded more than the author intended. Is it reasonable to assume that Beck’s volume—a skillfully crafted conglomerate of paper, ink, cloth, glue, stitching, and a lengthy message conveyed by symbols—is testimony to intelligent design, but the author who produced the book is but an accidental “freak” of nature? What kind of reasoning is that? It is atheistic reasoning

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111326 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
And your "natural science theory" does NOT have "all" the answers either!
In fact, that too, is FAR, FAR FROM having "all the answers"..
I am aware natural science does not have all the answers. So? But why make up answers when they cannot be found? Why deny the evidence when answers are found? That is what harms society.
Yes, I believe you harm society by being a science denier.
So spare me the "my beliefs are harmless" bullshit.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#111327 Aug 22, 2013
Thou shalt not confess the true origin of life.”
Atheism cannot explain the presence of biological life upon our planet. That mysterious essence known as “life” is a fantastic phenomenon that baffles the most brilliant within the scientific community.

Atheists believe that life was “spontaneously [accidentally] generated,” though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to demonstrate that postulation. In fact the maxim,“life comes only from life,” is so firmly verified that the concept is called “the law of biogenesis.”

Professor Harold J. Morowitz of Yale University, a biophysicist, and a militant evolutionist, acknowledged that the probability of sufficient “chance fluctuations” of the components necessary to form a living cell are on the order of 1 in 10 to the 340th million power. That’s a one followed by 340 million zeros!(1968, 99).

This figure is beyond one’s ability to even fathom. If the Universe were 30 billion years old (which it is not), that would only be 10 to the 18th power seconds. The entire known Universe, from one end to the other, is only estimated to be about 10 to the 28th power in inches!

Atheism, however, thrusts aside all evidence and common sense, and speculates that conditions on the primitive earth must have been so radically different from what they now are, that life somehow could have “jump-started” itself. The truth is, since life does not have the ability to create itself, it must have been fashioned by an eternally living Cause. That Cause is God (cf. Acts 17:25).

“Thou shalt not blame anyone for immoral conduct.”
Atheism cannot explain the concept of morality and ethics. Why is there in man, a sense of the “right” and “wrong,” when no other biological creature upon the globe entertains an ethical sensitivity?

In his book, The Meaning of Evolution, Dr. George Simpson began chapter XVIII, titled,“The Search For An Ethic,” with the following words:

“Man is a moral animal. With the exception of a few peculiar beings who are felt to be as surely crippled as if the deformity were physical, all men make judgments of good or bad in ethics and morals.”

Later he concedes that man “is the only ethical animal”(1949, 309ff).

But how does one determine what is “right” and what is “wrong”? Simpson and his atheistic kinsmen do not have the remotest idea.

The skeptic’s creed book is Humanist Manifestos I and II. Therein this statement is made:“Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction”(1973, 17, emphasis original).

This affirmation is ludicrous on the very face of it. If man is “autonomous”(a term signifying “self-law”), then there could never be a “situation” in which he could do wrong. He is a “law unto himself”(cf. Romans 2:14).

And so we are left with this curious circumstance. According to atheism, raw matter somehow produced an ethical mind, which concocted a “rubber” code of ethics which every man can manipulate to justify his own conduct, because, in the final analysis, he is morally autonomous, and thus ethics are irrelevant anyhow! What a circuitous route that leads to nowhere!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#111328 Aug 22, 2013
The Void of Unbelief
Finally, one must sadly note this. There is a voidness of soul that is an abiding companion of atheism ever haunting its devotees as no physical malignancy ever could.

After the death of former “Beatle” George Harrison, news sources quoted him as saying (in those final days when he knew cancer was consuming his life):“When all has been said, there are only three questions that matter. Where did I come from? What is my purpose? And where am I going?”

Had he posited these intriguing inquires to an atheist, he would have drawn a perfect blank.

As noted above, the atheist knows absolutely nothing relative to his origin. Moreover, from the skeptical vantage point there really is no purpose in human existence.

Professor Simpson declared that man’s discoveries about the Universe have led him to the conclusion that there is neither “purpose” or “plan” in his being (1949, 345).

And it is for certain that atheism has no “hope” beyond a cold hole in the ground. When Pierre Curie was killed in a tragic accident, his illustrious wife, Marie, who had abandoned the faith of her younger years, could only view his corpse and wail,“It is the end of everything, everything, everything!”(1937, 249).

The Scottish skeptic David Hume described himself as being “in the most deplorable condition imaginable, environed with the deepest darkness, and utterly deprived of the use of every member and faculty”(quoted in: Smith, 1945, 553).

And yet he once characterized his personal philosophical speculations as “cold and strained and ridiculous”(Brauer, 1971, 417).

Atheism is a bleak, worthless ideology. It robs the brain of reason, the conscience of moral guidance, the mind of tranquility, and the soul of hope.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111329 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
Stuff your self appointed decider judgemental "hypocrisy" up your OWN bloviated, wretched arse Duquette, if you can squeeze anything else beyond those piles of your own self esteemed (UN)righteousness Bullchit.
Someone does not know how to turn the other cheek as his god asks. What should I expect from a hypocrite? Or maybe you follow the old mean god and take an eye for an eye?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111330 Aug 22, 2013
mantle wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism’s Motives
Atheism arises out of human rebellion. After citing the arrogant claim,“There is no God”(Psalm 14:1), the psalmist provides the motive behind the infidelity:“they are corrupt, they have done abominable works. There is none that does good”(see 14:2ff).
Derek Kidner has well noted:
“The assertion,‘There is no God,’ is in fact treated in Scripture not as a sincere if misguided conviction, but as an irresponsible gesture of defiance. In the context of Psalm 10:4 it is expounded as a gamble against moral sanctions; in Job 21:7-15 as impatience of authority; in Romans 1:18ff. as intellectual and moral suicide”(1973, 79).
This base disposition may be illustrated amply from a sampling of modern atheistic writings. Bertrand Russell - who affirmed:“I see no reason … to believe in any sort of God”- subsequently wrote:“Outside human desires there is no moral standard”(1957, 33, 62).
Atheist philosopher Jean Paul Sartre declared:“Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist.” He further stated that without God there are no “values” that can “legitimize our behavior”(1961, 485). He went so far as to affirm:“We can never do evil”(1966, 279).
In his popular book, The Meaning of Evolution, the late Professor George G. Simpson of Harvard, a militant opponent of Christianity, sought to find some rationale for morality. In a chapter titled,“The Ethics of Knowledge and of Responsibility,” Simpson revealed more than he intended when he declared:“Man has risen, not fallen”(emphasis added).
Supposedly, then, humanity is free to evolve its own code of ethics; Simpson denied there is any “absolute ethical criterion” to which men need to yield (1949, 309ff). Man is his own god!
It is hardly difficult to see the self-centered motive that underlies the creed of atheism.
My post was directed to curious. Keep your cut and pastes to yourself and let him fight his own battles - as if he were capable.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111331 Aug 22, 2013
Leaving the Light On wrote:
"Never in the history of the world has there been ten rules that have caused such a disturbance in the conscience of a people as to affect a society, church, and government as do the Ten Commandments."
- Founder, www.GodstenLaws.com
I object to most of them due to them being unconstitutional to make law in America.

I am for freedom of religion, not religious law.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111332 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
Stuff your self appointed decider judgemental "hypocrisy" up your OWN bloviated, wretched arse Duquette, if you can squeeze anything else beyond those piles of your own self esteemed (UN)righteousness Bullchit.
Are you judging my "righteousness"? I thought your Jesus said that was not allowed.
Not as if this would be your first hypocrisy.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111333 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
YES-you DO tend to come across as a bully, not just a bully, but even more so-- as a MEAN, ILL-SPIRITED BULLY.
ESPECIALLY if anyone does not see things "YOUR way", or Disagrees with you, to which you then just resort to sophomoric name calling.
No, equating EXTREMENESS of anything-INCLUDING religion to terrorism is not outrageous. But equating different cultural traditions, customs and beliefs that are different from ones, and calling it all "terrorism" is NOT realistic either!
A
I did not call it terrorism, I compared the faith based mentality to that of the terrorists. You are the one that called me a terrorist, directly for being a bully.

Can you say anything without contradiction and hypocrisy?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#111334 Aug 22, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Someone does not know how to turn the other cheek as his god asks. What should I expect from a hypocrite? Or maybe you follow the old mean god and take an eye for an eye?
Hey , Duquette
As you have stated " This is your hobby , as with the other atheists that infest this website.
You are here to agitate and instigate with your boorish insights into human nature.
You will reap what you sow.
The poison you all concoct with your ludicrous philosophy , is the same drink that may quench your thirst as you gleefully sing"
Kool aid ,kool aid taste great , We want kool aid , can't wait.
The theme song for that false and deceptive teacher ,Jim Jones.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111335 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>

Let me tell you something of my OWN opinion MR Duquette.
THAT type of thing takes great deal of DIPLOMACY, deep insights and TOLERANCE, in a world full of MANY DIFFERENCES. And no matter how much ANYONE stands and tries to DEMAND that others see it all the SAME way, or ONLY one SPECIFIC way especially -it won't EVER happen, because that is NOT reality.
The BEST world leaders can hope for are UNDERSTANDINGS, grown and nurtured out of EARNED respect of and FOR the many differences in this old world, and mutual considerations and compromises of national alliances of shared INTEGRITY'S and ETHICS.
NOT WORLD DOMINANCE, because THAT type of stuff has been exactly what periled this world with people like Hitler.
Such cannot be gained by LIES OR INEPTNESS of mere flowery words either!
Just LOOK at what's going on world wide already!
I get that respect is needed, but I have little faith that the believers will come to respect the views of other beliefs or non beliefs. You see, the bible tells you that respect for other beliefs is not the way. Just see what Moses did when he brought down the commandments. He had the calf worshipers murdered.

Now if you could only change that holy book, I might could believe you guys will change. But as it was pointed out recently here by a Christian, atheists are looked at with the lest respect of any peoples in polls done around the world.

The wars between religions are still a major problem in our society.
So my theory is, slow the blind faith period and maybe we could slow the wars.

My theory is, if you believe blindly, then how can you tell others to not blindly believe their holy books that command them to kill you?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111336 Aug 22, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
Tough.
This is 21st century America-not dark age Babylon. I can be an Ahole too.
God did say, an eye for an eye, or was that Jesus? It was one of those gods.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.pixoto.com/quantumm

#111337 Aug 22, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I did not call it terrorism, I compared the faith based mentality to that of the terrorists. You are the one that called me a terrorist, directly for being a bully.
Can you say anything without contradiction and hypocrisy?
You better watch out, she's under the influence of the "Curse" and she will go all Caps Lock on you!

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
Cumberland Falls 1 hr Quantummist 8
Sav a lot 3 hr Judy 13
Who's tractor Sherman Lawson Steal ??? 3 hr Aum 22
Missing? 3 hr Missing 1
Blue Huron Mine Trestle by Q 4 hr Quantummist 1
A Dew moments of Zen by Q 4 hr Quantummist 2
KEA in Knox is not a Goodin 5 hr voters are not dumb 11
I would like to know if any Knox county teacher... 14 hr Huh 59

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages