Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 156570 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.

Since: Sep 13

United States of America

#120102 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try, and athiest has no foundation belief system therefore they are amoral.
An atheist often (probably too stupid to even know) adopt society morals which are in fact Judeo Christian morals.
You see the irony an atheist claims to be moral but the standard of morals are the Biblical Judeo Christian morals.
Pretty funny stuff if you ask me
The atheist refuses to have a standard so they adopt a Biblical standard of morality.
Wait.... is it your position that Judeo-Christian were the first to possess moral principles?

lol If you were any slower, you'd be going backward.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#120103 Dec 30, 2013
SistaNoneYa wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally, do NOT perceive it that way, but it is certainly your personal choice to.
Yes, you do. If I told you a story about my turtle who disappeared, you would NEVER believe "it grew wings and flew away" versus "it died and was buried somewhere".
SistaNoneYa wrote:
In any case-it sure made History, and then some.
It didn't make history; it *was made* by mythology.
Curious

Winter Garden, FL

#120104 Dec 30, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor curious, his mind is fuddled with superstitious mumbo jumbo.
I was reading that our DNA contains the codes for a protein called vitelligenin (it's what makes egg yolk).
I wonder what curious' explanation would be as to why the supreme creator being implanted these codes into our DNA.
After all those particular genes are not functional in us, but are virtually identical to the ones found in chickens (and other birds). Vitelligenin makes egg yolk so it is useful for animals that lay eggs but not for placental mammals like us.
Evolutionary Theory would explain this by saying that the three genes developed in common ancestors of mammals and birds (egg laying reptiles) and have fallen into disrepair in mammals where there was no selective advantage to keep them functional, but have remained intact in birds as they are still necessary.
That's the scientific view in brief.
Here's more of the science if you're interested....
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/19...
I wonder what the view from superstition and magic is?
I guess we'd better ask curious.
Glad you asked,.
It has been estimated that 1 cell can carry more information than that contained in a complete set of Encyclopedia Britanicas, We know that Natural laws are unable to create messages or information , messages and information are created by intelligence"minds"
So,how did this information get implanted into our DNA ?

I don't know why God implanted those codes into our DNA .
What I do believe is that God is the creator of life .
What evolutuionary theory Can Not tell us is where and how did all this information contained in our DNA originate?
Certainly could not be by natural laws , Laws do not have the ability to create
So we are back to a previous topic , how can inanimate matter create properties it itself neither posseses or has any way of being aware of them , life, intelligence and consciousness.
Fred Hoyle , an Atheist ,estimated that the possibility of inanimate matter spontaneouly creating life is 1 followed by 40,000 zeros.
Possibly ,now that you have another opportunity , you can provide the viable alternative that I have been asking the Atheists on this forum to provide.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#120105 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
You see the irony an atheist claims to be moral but the standard of morals are the Biblical Judeo Christian morals.
Pretty funny stuff if you ask me
The atheist refuses to have a standard so they adopt a Biblical standard of morality.
The Biblical god supports slavery, genocide, and rape. Neither I, nor any other atheist I know, adopts such LOW standards.

Judeo-Christian morality is primitive morality.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#120106 Dec 30, 2013
Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
What is harmful is your intentional misrepresentations of the facts or your ignorance of the facts.
Where is it written in the Bible that " Jesus said that all who say there is no God are fools.
Did I misunderstand what you wrote?
Psalms 14 and it looks as if it was someone else that said it, not Jesus. I plead ignorance. I forgot most of the crap in the NT is not of Jesus.
Curious

Winter Garden, FL

#120107 Dec 30, 2013
In one of his debates , Chris Hitchens tried to make the poit that ,if there was an intelligent creator , said creator got it all wrong.
His opinion was partly based on the following;
We are heading for a huge disaster , as the Andromeda Galaxy is heading for a collision with our own galaxy.
How could an intelligent creator commit such an error.
We are heading for total destruction of our Universe.
And if we analyze those facts based on our limited human intelligence , one would probably agree that an error was made by the Creator.
But , that such an event would occur is prophesied in the Bible
Read revelation 6;12to 14
Read revelation21;1,2.

Moreover, at one time Atheists believed the Universe was Eternal.
If that belief were to be proven to be accurate, it would destroy the Bible starting with the first sentence , Inthe begining God created the Heavens and the Earth.
That the Earth and the Universe were created has been proven by Science.
That man was formed from the dust in the ground has also been proven, Atheists call it Stardust ,matters not.
Same thing,no matter what name you give it.
Curious

Winter Garden, FL

#120108 Dec 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Psalms 14 and it looks as if it was someone else that said it, not Jesus. I plead ignorance. I forgot most of the crap in the NT is not of Jesus.
No problem.
Where you continuously err is by posting crap by not presenting all the evidence needed
on a particular issue that you raise and take out of context.
Known Fact

Orlando, FL

#120109 Dec 30, 2013
Whose influence is pushing the nations to the world situation that will result in war against God?
Rev. 16:13, 14:“I saw three unclean inspired expressions that looked like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon [Satan the Devil; Rev. 12:9] and out of the mouth of the wild beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and perform signs, and they go forth to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day of God the Almighty.”

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

London, KY

#120110 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
Acts of war are not Murder.
Tell that to the Jews at Auschwitz.....

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#120111 Dec 30, 2013
Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
No problem.
Where you continuously err is by posting crap by not presenting all the evidence needed
on a particular issue that you raise and take out of context.
Unlike yourself, I can admit err, and try not to repeat said err.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#120112 Dec 30, 2013
Curious wrote:
In one of his debates , Chris Hitchens tried to make the poit that ,if there was an intelligent creator , said creator got it all wrong.
His opinion was partly based on the following;
We are heading for a huge disaster , as the Andromeda Galaxy is heading for a collision with our own galaxy.
How could an intelligent creator commit such an error.
We are heading for total destruction of our Universe.
And if we analyze those facts based on our limited human intelligence , one would probably agree that an error was made by the Creator.
But , that such an event would occur is prophesied in the Bible
Read revelation 6;12to 14
Read revelation21;1,2.
Moreover, at one time Atheists believed the Universe was Eternal.
If that belief were to be proven to be accurate, it would destroy the Bible starting with the first sentence , Inthe begining God created the Heavens and the Earth.
That the Earth and the Universe were created has been proven by Science.
That man was formed from the dust in the ground has also been proven, Atheists call it Stardust ,matters not.
Same thing,no matter what name you give it.
Now if you could only show a god had anything to do with what you just claimed.
And if Hitchens said it would destroy our universe, he is wrong according to the science of the day. The collision need not even disrupt our solar system.
But our solar system will be destroyed by our sun in about five billion years. Not that I think humans will survive that long.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#120113 Dec 30, 2013
Curious wrote:
In one of his debates , Chris Hitchens tried to make the poit that ,if there was an intelligent creator , said creator got it all wrong.
His opinion was partly based on the following;
We are heading for a huge disaster , as the Andromeda Galaxy is heading for a collision with our own galaxy.
How could an intelligent creator commit such an error.
We are heading for total destruction of our Universe.
And if we analyze those facts based on our limited human intelligence , one would probably agree that an error was made by the Creator.
But , that such an event would occur is prophesied in the Bible
Read revelation 6;12to 14
Read revelation21;1,2.
Moreover, at one time Atheists believed the Universe was Eternal.
If that belief were to be proven to be accurate, it would destroy the Bible starting with the first sentence , Inthe begining God created the Heavens and the Earth.
That the Earth and the Universe were created has been proven by Science.
That man was formed from the dust in the ground has also been proven, Atheists call it Stardust ,matters not.
Same thing,no matter what name you give it.
I am pretty sure the creation story was destroyed when it was understood all was not created in six days. But you guys made excuses for that. Then it was destroyed when it was understood all the kinds of animals were not created all at one time. But you do not believe that.
No matter what gets destroyed in your story, you will cling to others.
Curious

Winter Garden, FL

#120114 Dec 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Unlike yourself, I can admit err, and try not to repeat said err.
Mikey , I have been erring and doing that which I shoild not have done going back as far as I can remember.
I could never say that I've never done anything for which I need not be ashamed.
Matter of fact , I can't even claim that the Good I have done outweighs the bad ,if I did ,i'd be lying.

There is no way that I can compensate for the wrongs I have done , That is why I am overjoyed that Christ was willing to pay the price for what I have done. He gave his life in order to save , not onli mine , but that of many others.
I know that among Atheists his sacrifice is considered to be immoral , After all , one can show no greater love , than to lay his life down for his fellow man. Even those who hate him.
Curious

Winter Garden, FL

#120115 Dec 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Now if you could only show a god had anything to do with what you just claimed.
And if Hitchens said it would destroy our universe, he is wrong according to the science of the day. The collision need not even disrupt our solar system.
But our solar system will be destroyed by our sun in about five billion years. Not that I think humans will survive that long.
I am claiming that in order for life and the Universe to be created , you need Intelligent Design
" GOD"
You don't believe that , you believe there is anothe explanation.
What is that explanation?
In a debate , Hitchens was challenged to give his views as to how the Universe could be created ,by other than intelligebnt design.
He attempted to duck the question by stating he was not qualified to answer it
Then ,his book was used as evidence where he stated that God was not needed in the creation of the Universe , which he denied having said , up until the quote from his book was brought out.
He was cornered ,hemmed and hawed and claimed he had been misunderstood.
Now ,I ask you , If you don't believe God was needed in said creation ,then , what caused said creation.

Since: Sep 13

United States of America

#120116 Dec 30, 2013
Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
I am claiming that in order for life and the Universe to be created , you need Intelligent Design
" GOD"
You don't believe that , you believe there is anothe explanation.
What is that explanation?
In a debate , Hitchens was challenged to give his views as to how the Universe could be created ,by other than intelligebnt design.
He attempted to duck the question by stating he was not qualified to answer it
Then ,his book was used as evidence where he stated that God was not needed in the creation of the Universe , which he denied having said , up until the quote from his book was brought out.
He was cornered ,hemmed and hawed and claimed he had been misunderstood.
Now ,I ask you , If you don't believe God was needed in said creation ,then , what caused said creation.
We've already covered this, you just refuse to listen to reason.
This claim is nothing more than an excuse that design theorists use to try to explain away their own failure to make their case. When someone proposes a new scientific theory, it is that person's responsibility to make a case for it. Scientific theories have, in the past, achieved wide acceptance despite strong cultural and scientific resistance.(Evolution itself is an example.) If there is substance to ID theory, its proponents must make it clear.

If there were anything to ID theory, there should be more than enough biologists to help the design theorists make their case.

You refuse to recognize the flaws in your theory. Your religious motivation is obvious. Just as important,you do not follow the usual scientific procedure of testing your ideas.

A scientific theory is tested by subjecting it to a very real chance of falsification. Scientists make specific predictions based on the theory, look to see if the predictions pan out, and consider the theory false if the results cannot fit what was expected. Intelligent design theorists, unlike evolutionary scientists, do not put their ideas to such risks. Apparently, they do not want their ideas at risk.

Design theory is older than Darwin's theory of evolution. Design theory has nothing but its own lack of worth to blame for its failure.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#120117 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
I told you that is a stupid question. Read Exodus 20 the 10 Commandments
Thou shall not murder.
That's three times I've asked you the question and three times you've ran away from it.

What is it about the christian faith that makes believers you so afraid of this question?

Ah well, I guess being a Christian also means being a coward.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#120118 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
Define "Dark Ages"
The unbeliever should celebrate this period because during this time the Government tried to kill the Christians (so did the muslums)
Dark Ages?

A time when Christianity was in charge and the light of science was nearly extinguished.

Which government tried to kill Christians?

In any event, Christian governments have killed more than their share of people.

*Note how I don't run away from your questions.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#120119 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you claiming Jesus Christ never lived?
The evidence is flimsy but there may have been one or more people who fit that bill.

So yes, there could well have been a Jesus.

However, I don't accept all the superstition and magic that people attach to him.

*Note that I answered your question again.

Care to face up to my question?

Or are you going to run away from it again?

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#120120 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no contradiction in those passages
Who said there was?

Not me.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#120121 Dec 30, 2013
SevenT wrote:
<quoted text>
The Ezekiel passage is not referring to bowing down before another god. That is not a contradiction either. You will not find one.
Of course it's a contradiction.

If you believe that Exodus is an accurate record of what God said to Moses then you can't believe that Ezekiel got it right.

Or if you believe Ezekiel did get it right then Moses must have got it wrong.

I see that you ignored the other contradiction I raised about God repenting/not repenting.

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.

Manchester Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Johnny Holland (Apr '12) 3 hr retspih 24
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Kentucky (... (Oct '10) 3 hr hot dog 755
Spurgeon Sizemore (Jan '14) Tue Cock fighters 16
Vida blue sizemore Tue zootopia 5
Who was found dead on ham holler? Dec 5 Dont Know 8
Larry Collins slacked let it all happen under h... (Feb '14) Dec 3 crazy bitch 20
Karen Lawson posts being deleted. Dec 3 motorboater 10

Manchester Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Manchester Mortgages