Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 159449 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

#137106 Sep 13, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
<quoted text> Man get a life. Point to hell do you be live in the devil.
Get an education.
Can you point to hell? I would love for you to show me exactly where it is, as no one can see it. Why would an atheist believe in such a place, as there is zero evidence of such a place? We do not fear imaginary places.
The very idea we would go to hell for not believing in the claimed place is illogical and immoral. Thus it leads me to think your bible is not true. It leads me to think the story of heaven and hell are false tales.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#137107 Sep 13, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
<quoted text> Man get a life. Point to hell do you be live in the devil.
I have a life, thank you. I was never cut out to be a groupie, a Trekkie or a Jesus freak. Two questions: Don't you realize that hell simply means grave? What does "be live in the devil" mean? If you meant "believe in", the answer is no, of course I don't believe in mythical creatures. That would be inane.
havent forgotten

Lamoni, IA

#137108 Sep 13, 2014
the reply option seems to be missing on the last few comments. Of course atheists do not believe that a devil exists. However, if one did, and if one defined it as an evil supernatural invisible being, it would resemble the right -wing extremist version of the Christian God.
havent forgotten

Lamoni, IA

#137109 Sep 13, 2014
I am not a fan of Quatumist's comments. However, his photographs are lovely and he should regularly put up a link to them. Also, there was a great program on public TV recently about the artistic abilities of various royals in English history - and also about Prince Charles and his niece.
Lovely scenery and amazingly good art.
havent forgotten

Lamoni, IA

#137110 Sep 13, 2014
sometimes the differences between non-extremists are more interesting - usually they are . so the discussion between forcing never works and his/her critic (mildly corrective but not hostile) is an interesting one. I suspect that they could have a civil conversation and reach many points of agreement. That is impossible between the extremes At the extremes there is clearly one rational point of view and one arrogant superstitioius point of view. The skeptics on this thread are particularly reasonable and rational persons. Too bad topix attracts too many extreme rightwing religious types. Some religious types do believe in separation of church and state, and some do not insist that their views are the only true belief system.
spaceship

Rancho Cordova, CA

#137111 Sep 13, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
<quoted text> Man get a life. Point to hell do you be live in the devil.
Hell is mistranslation of the Hebrew word Sheol which means the grave or where you are laid for eternity when you die.

Please note if Jonah was in "hell," as the KJV has it, then Jonah escaped from a place where, according to modern theologians, there is no escape.

Compare KJV
Jonah 2:2King James Version

2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.

Compare NIV
Jonah 2:2
The New International Version: 1973

He said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depths of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
----------

Books of the Bible, such as Ecclesiastes and Job, insist that all of the dead go down to Sheol, whether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free man (Job 3:11-19).
spaceship

Rancho Cordova, CA

#137112 Sep 13, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
<quoted text> Man get a life. Point to hell do you be live in the devil.
The concept of evil men going to a place of torment after death first appeared in Jewish apocryphal writings of 3 to 1 B.C. These writings came from the thoughts of the Babylonian religions which the Jews brought back with them from Babylon. It was these books which spoke of eternal separation of good and evil and equating it to man's ultimate fate. Many Jews mixed these teachings with Judaism which brought about great problems. These writings, found their way into the Greek Septuagint. The Septuagint was used by the early Church. From there these writings got into the Latin Vulgate. Early English translations relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate. Those that used the Greek, also relied heavily upon the Septuagint. The early English translations were either translated from the Latin with the Apocrypha, or the Septuagint, which also contained the Apocrypha. Each translation also relied heavily on other translations. Tyndale, for example, borrowed greatly from Martin Luther. The King James directly copied much from previous translations that came directly from the Latin Vulgate.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theol...
Forcing never works

Cincinnati, OH

#137113 Sep 13, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, but some phrases in your post raise questions.
"...protect their children from religious beliefs of others"?
"A faith responsible parent..."?
I'm of the opinion that a child of tender years hasn't developed the comprehension necessary to choose their own faith, if they are so inclined. I've never been a fan of brainwashing and there are cases where I would consider it abuse. "Protecting" from knowledge of other faiths is not a responsible act - particularly when there are knuckle-headed zealots who think that "Darwinism" and astrophysics are "faiths."
So back to the original issue...religion doesn't belong in the public school system, there other appropriate places to teach your children if you're so incline to do so. If you feel the need to teach your child of other faiths send them to synagogue, mosque, prophet, monastery, private school or Christian camp...whatever your heart calls you to do. The public school classroom is not the place for it. I will and I have protected my children from a false prophet Ronald Weinland. I cant imagine what would qualify and be incorporated into our public schools if a religion class were allowed. Its a slippery slope my friend

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.pixoto.com/quantumm

#137114 Sep 13, 2014
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, I get it now. So I should say "I know I am typing on a computer" instead of saying "I believe I am typing on a computer"? Now that I wrote that last sentence, it is very clear how silly the latter sounds.
I had a feeling you would show me as wrong on this, and I am glad you did.
At least you get my point... Some never do... The word Believe gets tossed around so often that it becomes casual and even the most noted researchers fall into the trap... Then when the laymen hear it they take it and run with it never considering it does not mean what they think it does... The use of the word is really bad in some fields of study and has caused those that have not done a lot of research themselves to take it that the commenter is saying they "Know" something is a fact when it is not...

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#137116 Sep 13, 2014
Forcing never works wrote:
<quoted text>
So back to the original issue...religion doesn't belong in the public school system, there other appropriate places to teach your children if you're so incline to do so. If you feel the need to teach your child of other faiths send them to synagogue, mosque, prophet, monastery, private school or Christian camp...whatever your heart calls you to do. The public school classroom is not the place for it. I will and I have protected my children from a false prophet Ronald Weinland. I cant imagine what would qualify and be incorporated into our public schools if a religion class were allowed. Its a slippery slope my friend
I agree that religion does not belong in the public school system. I do think that there is a place for a comparative study of religions in a humanities class and recognizing the influence of religions on history - but not in a primary school setting.
BRAIN STORM

Campbellsville, KY

#137117 Sep 13, 2014
spaceship wrote:
<quoted text>
Hell is mistranslation of the Hebrew word Sheol which means the grave or where you are laid for eternity when you die.
Please note if Jonah was in "hell," as the KJV has it, then Jonah escaped from a place where, according to modern theologians, there is no escape.
Compare KJV
Jonah 2:2King James Version
2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
Compare NIV
Jonah 2:2
The New International Version: 1973
He said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depths of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
----------
Books of the Bible, such as Ecclesiastes and Job, insist that all of the dead go down to Sheol, whether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free man (Job 3:11-19).
Almost all of the religious paintings,(if not all) prior to the 14th Century Epic Poem( Dante's Inferno) depicted Hell as a Cold Dark Place, not Hot and Fiery. Satan was also depicted as being "Blue" with a goats head. After Dante wrote Inferno , Paintings changed, and the way hell was pictured, thought about and described changed. After Dante, Hell was always depicted as a Hot Fiery place, and Satan became Red with all his versions. Which is the way most people today envision Hell when they talk about it. So does the Bible say that Hell Is a hot Fiery place? Or is that something that people have just added to it since Dante wrote his poem? Obviously the religious people up until that time thought of Hell as Cold and Dark, the artwork prior to that time period shows that. And as far a I know they studied the same bible as religious people today.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#137118 Sep 14, 2014
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
At least you get my point... Some never do... The word Believe gets tossed around so often that it becomes casual and even the most noted researchers fall into the trap... Then when the laymen hear it they take it and run with it never considering it does not mean what they think it does... The use of the word is really bad in some fields of study and has caused those that have not done a lot of research themselves to take it that the commenter is saying they "Know" something is a fact when it is not...
The limits of language are definitely troublesome, yet we have to communicate. I will use the word "believe" at times, casually. As in "Yeah, I believe so."

Also, you believe something when you are convinced it is true. I don't think that equates perfectly with *knowing* something to be true. That in itself is a very difficult philosophical problem. It is possible we cannot "know" anything at all. So I think of it on a scale of probability. I am typing on a keyboard. The probability of that being false is so tiny it would seem insane for me to claim otherwise. If the context was a philosophical discussion about knowledge I might say "I believe I am typing on a keyboard" and I would be more correct, technically, than saying "I know I am typing on a keyboard."

Of course it is all a matter of degrees of certainty. And there is a problem here in that some people who want to defend strange beliefs will cling to that tiny, tiny gray area between absolute certainty (probably impossible to attain) and wishy-washy uncertainty where things have a 50/50 shot. That's where they stick many of their cherished weird beliefs...thus "God of the gaps".

I wish people could think on a spectrum rather than in either/or modes.
colt 45

United States

#137119 Sep 14, 2014
God rules...
colt 45

United States

#137120 Sep 14, 2014
God is great. Told these people's I'm not fussing back and forth. Its America I'll type on my key board the way I want. Cause I be live.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#137121 Sep 14, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
God is great. Told these people's I'm not fussing back and forth. Its America I'll type on my key board the way I want. Cause I be live.
You aren't "fussing" back and forth because you cannot debate your position, you can only restate it. Typing anything you want does not make anything you want become true. "Because I be live" is not evidence of reality.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#137122 Sep 14, 2014
colt 45 wrote:
God is great. Told these people's I'm not fussing back and forth. Its America I'll type on my key board the way I want. Cause I be live.
Yes, you can type on your keyboard all you wish. No one demanded you stop. And we will type what we think also, and you cannot stop us. You can believe what you wish, even though you do not know how to write it.
I hope you do keep typing here, as you are a great stereotype of what we are talking about. I could care less if you do not attempt to defend yourself. But it will not stop me from calling out your silliness.
I do not think your god is great.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#137123 Sep 14, 2014
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
The limits of language are definitely troublesome, yet we have to communicate. I will use the word "believe" at times, casually. As in "Yeah, I believe so."
Also, you believe something when you are convinced it is true. I don't think that equates perfectly with *knowing* something to be true. That in itself is a very difficult philosophical problem. It is possible we cannot "know" anything at all. So I think of it on a scale of probability. I am typing on a keyboard. The probability of that being false is so tiny it would seem insane for me to claim otherwise. If the context was a philosophical discussion about knowledge I might say "I believe I am typing on a keyboard" and I would be more correct, technically, than saying "I know I am typing on a keyboard."
Of course it is all a matter of degrees of certainty. And there is a problem here in that some people who want to defend strange beliefs will cling to that tiny, tiny gray area between absolute certainty (probably impossible to attain) and wishy-washy uncertainty where things have a 50/50 shot. That's where they stick many of their cherished weird beliefs...thus "God of the gaps".
I wish people could think on a spectrum rather than in either/or modes.
Those are some very good points. I may not be typing, I may be dreaming I am typing, or be in a matrix. But I do believe I am typing, and that usage seems to fit.
I know Q. often uses this argument on evolution. I feel evolution is true due to the overwhelming evidence for it. Seems it would be appropriate to claim I believe evolution is true. Yet I do not see this as being of any sort of religious type of belief without evidence.
I do feel certain evolution is true. I do not think the science is wrong, thus I believe the science. This does not mean I cannot alter my beliefs.
Q. If I am missing something here, please tell me.
spaceship

Rancho Cordova, CA

#137124 Sep 14, 2014
BRAIN STORM wrote:
<quoted text> So does the Bible say that Hell Is a hot Fiery place? Or is that something that people have just added to it since Dante wrote his poem? Obviously the religious people up until that time thought of Hell as Cold and Dark, the artwork prior to that time period shows that. And as far a I know they studied the same bible as religious people today.
Depends on how a person was indoctrinated by their religious leaders. Hel or Hell is simply a mistranslation of grave. Your correct in saying the meaning of the word was added later date to mean hell-fire . Gehenna is not hell fire, Gehenna is garbage dump where the Hebrews burn trash, dead animals or bodies deem not worthy of a burial. So yes an no, depending on the bible translation you have read and the theology you have been indoctrinated with will determine what you believe.


http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/65...

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.pixoto.com/quantumm

#137126 Sep 14, 2014
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are some very good points. I may not be typing, I may be dreaming I am typing, or be in a matrix. But I do believe I am typing, and that usage seems to fit.
I know Q. often uses this argument on evolution. I feel evolution is true due to the overwhelming evidence for it. Seems it would be appropriate to claim I believe evolution is true. Yet I do not see this as being of any sort of religious type of belief without evidence.
I do feel certain evolution is true. I do not think the science is wrong, thus I believe the science. This does not mean I cannot alter my beliefs.
Q. If I am missing something here, please tell me.
Well Mike my view is that I know Evolution is a fact in the actually over arching theory... The massive evidence that is fully testable and reproducible lead me to that conclusion... But when we get to the more specific aspects I move to the I think I know and in some Very limited points I do not know... I think the problem with most is they have a simplistic view of what the Theory says and roll it all up into a simple linear claim ... That does not really show the complexity of the evolutionary processes..

The basic view that over time a species can change to a point that it can be grouped into a separate species is evidence a million times over... Even human breeding programs show this to be the case... But the theory does not cover the first point where we call life begins.. We actually do not know specifically what constitutes life as we have only those examples on this one planet and even those we are still learning about... There could be life even on this planet we would not in the slightest recognize as such... While the basic evolution is true there could still be separate forms of life that have been created... One view does not exclude the other...

So is the narrative of Modern Man evolving from more primitive Hominids true, I would say I think I know.... There are some points of evidence I have questions about... I think that evolution is a punctuated process and that species can change very quickly to fit new environs and then slowly change once in a stable environment, or not change at all...

So while I Know that the basic construct of evolution is true, I think I know how modern species became as they are today but I do not know what constitutes life specifically, what was the first step in the formation of life, if that first step happened on this planet or another millions of light years away and I do not know if other life forms may have interceded in the process...

And of course if someone has a belief in something it can be changed but as I said it denotes faith without the requirement of evidence and can lead to emotional attachment.. This is just a general view on my part... I myself have to catch myself saying I believe something and make the specific effort to not do so... But in my experience when most use the term they become emotionally invested and will go to great extremes to protect what they Believe in... They will not except direct evidence, they will rationalize, obfuscate, lie, cheat, and sometimes kill to maintain that which they believe in... Even when such belief is testable wrong...

So I have made the choice to never believe.. By doing so I avoid falling into the trap of cognitive dissonance and allow for any new evidence to alter my understanding and even seek out those that can show me to be wrong in what I Think I Know... Take my postulate... I think it to be true but I have no faith that it is, I actively tell anyone to anyone to rip it to shreds and have asked many well known physicists to destroy it... Which is what I Think all scientific researchers should do.. When a researcher states he believes his view is absolute then I from the start do not believe him... Hence my issues with CAGW/CACC claims... And other fields of study..

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#137127 Sep 14, 2014
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Mike my view is that I know Evolution is a fact in the actually over arching theory... The massive evidence that is fully testable and reproducible lead me to that conclusion... But when we get to the more specific aspects I move to the I think I know and in some Very limited points I do not know... I think the problem with most is they have a simplistic view of what the Theory says and roll it all up into a simple linear claim ... That does not really show the complexity of the evolutionary processes..
The basic view that over time a species can change to a point that it can be grouped into a separate species is evidence a million times over... Even human breeding programs show this to be the case... But the theory does not cover the first point where we call life begins.. We actually do not know specifically what constitutes life as we have only those examples on this one planet and even those we are still learning about... There could be life even on this planet we would not in the slightest recognize as such... While the basic evolution is true there could still be separate forms of life that have been created... One view does not exclude the other...
So is the narrative of Modern Man evolving from more primitive Hominids true, I would say I think I know.... There are some points of evidence I have questions about... I think that evolution is a punctuated process and that species can change very quickly to fit new environs and then slowly change once in a stable environment, or not change at all...
So while I Know that the basic construct of evolution is true, I think I know how modern species became as they are today but I do not know what constitutes life specifically, what was the first step in the formation of life, if that first step happened on this planet or another millions of light years away and I do not know if other life forms may have interceded in the process...
And of course if someone has a belief in something it can be changed but as I said it denotes faith without the requirement of evidence and can lead to emotional attachment.. This is just a general view on my part... I myself have to catch myself saying I believe something and make the specific effort to not do so... But in my experience when most use the term they become emotionally invested and will go to great extremes to protect what they Believe in... They will not except direct evidence, they will rationalize, obfuscate, lie, cheat, and sometimes kill to maintain that which they believe in... Even when such belief is testable wrong...
So I have made the choice to never believe.. By doing so I avoid falling into the trap of cognitive dissonance and allow for any new evidence to alter my understanding and even seek out those that can show me to be wrong in what I Think I Know... Take my postulate... I think it to be true but I have no faith that it is, I actively tell anyone to anyone to rip it to shreds and have asked many well known physicists to destroy it... Which is what I Think all scientific researchers should do.. When a researcher states he believes his view is absolute then I from the start do not believe him... Hence my issues with CAGW/CACC claims... And other fields of study..
Good answer, and it makes a lot of sense. Thanks for clarifying.

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
Heidrick 3 min Quantummist 13
Artemus Bridge 29 min Quantummist 3
New business 48 min bvillain 5
Methheads 51 min Facts 4
{keep a word drop a word} (Oct '11) 1 hr Princess Hey 3,970
finger lickin good 5 hr yardbird lover 6
Wow 5 hr Wow 1
Body Found 15 hr mike 3

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages