Atheist teen forces school to remove prayer

[RPMDAD]

QUOTE=MMM_donuts;4748055]Doesn't anybody else kinda consider it kind of an oxymoron that a bunch of (assuming) Christians would send death threats to a 16yo over having a hanging in a school removed? How very Christ-like of them That's no way to encourage her to consider Christianity....no wonder she's an atheist. And that's no way for adults to act, period.

I'm also assuming this is a public school. Why don't they just add other prayers to the wall to demonstrate a history of the religions? Or would Christians freak out and demand that Muslim prayer be taken down?

Why do public schools still does this kind of controversial stuff? Are they making a point to "keep God in school"? Just asking out of curiosity and seriousness - please don't attack me, I'm not trying to make any kind of anti-Christian statement.[/QUOTE]

These are probably the same Christians that blow up abortion clinics and kill Dr.'s who perform abortion. But they only do it in the name of their Lord. [

 

[UNA]

Yep, why not? In a true democracy that's how things work.

No, no it's not.

That's why we have a system of checks and balances in our government. If a majority decides that blondes aren't allowed to vote and a bunch of states pass it, it can be overturned by the courts.

 

[UNA]

I do apologize for sounding so strong. Don't try to read too much into the question. I am always curious to see what others think about good, evil, etc.

Well then you have my answer! No worries!

Obviously they are hypocrits. I don't think anybody has missed that. The bible is pretty clear in Romans 12:

So.....they're not Christian? Or just not good Christians?

Don't worry about those guys fair Una, God will look after them. Worry about yourself and God. That's what's important.

Thank you for the advice but I'm going to continue to worry about people like that because talk leads to action.

 

[Zguy28]

Well then you have my answer! No worries!



So.....they're not Christian? Or just not good Christians?

God will be the judge. Suffice it to say, they are not walking in the instruction of the Lord.

Thank you for the advice but I'm going to continue to worry about people like that because talk leads to action.

True. If anything, the worry is all the more, because if something fatal happens to her, she is destined for a most unpleasant place. I pray that these folks come back to the word of God and that she would be converted, not hurt.

 

[UNA]

God will be the judge. Suffice it to say, they are not walking in the instruction of the Lord.

No True Scotsman: Logical Fallacies

True. If anything, the worry is all the more, because if something fatal happens to her, she is destined for a most unpleasant place. I pray that these folks come back to the word of God and that she would be converted, not hurt.

I respect you freedom to this opinion, as long as you understand that's what it is

 

[Zguy28]

No True Scotsman: Logical Fallacies

Mis-characterization of what somebody says is not only dishonest, it's a tactic used by those not interested in serious discussion. I didn't think you were that type.

Anyway, where is what I posted untrue?

Will God judge them (and us)? Yep.

Are they walking in the way specified in Scripture? Nope.

Doesn't mean they are not Christians, although some may not be (who knows but God? Certainly not me, and certainly not you). But then I'm sure some of them are, but are not acting very much like a disciple of the Lord Jesus.

I respect you freedom to this opinion, as long as you understand that's what it is

As I respect yours, as long as you understand that I don't believe its an opinion, but rather a fact. Even so, it matters not to you, correct? You believe it is myth, so you shouldn't be scared or intimidated by it then. Especially since, as an evangelical Christian I want you to be saved, not perish. That's the last thing I would want.

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

No True Scotsman: Logical Fallacies

Mis-characterization of what somebody says is not only dishonest, it's a tactic used by those not interested in serious discussion. I didn't think you were that type.

Anyway, where is what I posted untrue?

Will God judge them (and us)? Yep.

Are they walking in the way specified in Scripture? Nope.

Doesn't mean they are not Christians, although some may not be (who knows but God? Certainly not me, and certainly not you). But then I'm sure some of them are, but are not acting very much like a disciple of the Lord Jesus.

I respect you freedom to this opinion, as long as you understand that's what it is

As I respect yours, as long as you understand that I don't believe its an opinion, but rather a fact. Even so, it matters not to you, correct? You believe it is myth, so you shouldn't be scared or intimidated by it then. Especially since, as an evangelical Christian I want you to be saved, not perish. That's the last thing I would want.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying by posting the link. I didn't say that you'd said anything 'untrue' rather that you've redefined a group in order to avoid being associated with a negative aspect of it. You've don't it twice now. 'I'm a Christian, but even if they are they're not saved...so I'm different'.

And that you 'beleive' it's a 'fact' IS what concerns me; a great deal in fact. It concerns me because people act on what they beleive. You beleive in a set of hypothesis that are unproven. OK. But...within the hypothesis in which you beleive are little bits of murder, violence, persecution, racism, sexism, homophobia, indoctrination, class warfare, genocide, vengeance, slavery.......

Concerning to say the least.

But thanks for not wanting me to perish!

 

[puggymom]

Yep, why not? In a true democracy that's how things work.

We are not a democracy but a Constitutional Republic.

 

[Zguy28]

Wirelessly posted



I think you misunderstood what I was saying by posting the link. I didn't say that you'd said anything 'untrue' rather that you've redefined a group in order to avoid being associated with a negative aspect of it. You've don't it twice now. 'I'm a Christian, but even if they are they're not saved...so I'm different'.

I didn't say they were not Christians. I said:

Obviously they are hypocrits. I don't think anybody has missed that. The bible is pretty clear in Romans 12:

Can one be a Christian and have hypocrisy in your life? Absolutely. We all do. I'm not disassociating from anybody using a logical fallacy. Their actions don't line up with the Word. Period.

Now, the church may choose to disassociate an unrepentant person. Isn't that what you would think is a good thing?

And that you 'beleive' it's a 'fact' IS what concerns me; a great deal in fact. It concerns me because people act on what they beleive. You beleive in a set of hypothesis that are unproven. OK. But...within the hypothesis in which you beleive are little bits of murder, violence, persecution, racism, sexism, homophobia, indoctrination, class warfare, genocide, vengeance, slavery.......

Concerning to say the least.

The bible is pretty clear (like I said) on what is acceptable and expected behavior for God's people in Christ. The standard doesn't change, but people will be people in a fallen world.

But thanks for not wanting me to perish!

I sincerely wish it.

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



I think you misunderstood what I was saying by posting the link. I didn't say that you'd said anything 'untrue' rather that you've redefined a group in order to avoid being associated with a negative aspect of it. You've don't it twice now. 'I'm a Christian, but even if they are they're not saved...so I'm different'.

I didn't say they were not Christians. I said:

Obviously they are hypocrits. I don't think anybody has missed that. The bible is pretty clear in Romans 12:

Can one be a Christian and have hypocrisy in your life? Absolutely. We all do. I'm not disassociating from anybody using a logical fallacy. Their actions don't line up with the Word. Period.

Now, the church may choose to disassociate an unrepentant person. Isn't that what you would think is a good thing?

And that you 'beleive' it's a 'fact' IS what concerns me; a great deal in fact. It concerns me because people act on what they beleive. You beleive in a set of hypothesis that are unproven. OK. But...within the hypothesis in which you beleive are little bits of murder, violence, persecution, racism, sexism, homophobia, indoctrination, class warfare, genocide, vengeance, slavery.......

Concerning to say the least.

The bible is pretty clear (like I said) on what is acceptable and expected behavior for God's people in Christ. The standard doesn't change, but people will be people in a fallen world.

But thanks for not wanting me to perish!

I sincerely wish it.

You're disassociating yourself by saying that they are not holding to the TRUE word; the word that you (presumably) do hold too.

The standard DOES change. OT to NT it 'changed'. It's changed in America; genocide is not good, slavery is forbidden, rape victims are no longer required to marry their attackers, the rich aren't universally condemed (except by some of course, but not my today' religious right). Those things were standard, now they're not. The standard changed.

 

[Zguy28]

Wirelessly posted



You're disassociating yourself by saying that they are not holding to the TRUE word; the word that you (presumably) do hold too.

The standard DOES change. OT to NT it 'changed'. It's changed in America; genocide is not good, slavery is forbidden, rape victims are no longer required to marry their attackers, the rich aren't universally condemed (except by some of course, but not my today' religious right). Those things were standard, now they're not. The standard changed.

What standard has changed? Society and culture? That's the humanist belief.

The Bible is the Christian standard. It has not changed. Romans 12 is still Romans 12. Some choose to ignore it, others do not.

But, if you want to argue just to argue (which seems to be the case now), I will be departing. Take care!

 

[EmptyTimCup]

Death Threats are NOT Christian ......... but stupid

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



You're disassociating yourself by saying that they are not holding to the TRUE word; the word that you (presumably) do hold too.

The standard DOES change. OT to NT it 'changed'. It's changed in America; genocide is not good, slavery is forbidden, rape victims are no longer required to marry their attackers, the rich aren't universally condemed (except by some of course, but not my today' religious right). Those things were standard, now they're not. The standard changed.

What standard has changed? Society and culture? That's the humanist belief.

The Bible is the Christian standard. It has not changed. Romans 12 is still Romans 12. Some choose to ignore it, others do not.

But, if you want to argue just to argue (which seems to be the case now), I will be departing. Take care!

I did not mean that the words in the bible literally changed. The standard to which God holds his followers changed from the OT to the NT. Even how people interpret the Bible changed. The standard for Christianity changes. How can you argue that it hasn't?

Arguing just to argue? 1) no one is forcing you to continue the debate and 2) I continue to make points, or would you rather I sit down and shut up?

 

[Zguy28]

Wirelessly posted



I did not mean that the words in the bible literally changed. The standard to which God holds his followers changed from the OT to the NT. Even how people interpret the Bible changed. The standard for Christianity changes. How can you argue that it hasn't?

God still holds people to the same standard. Moral and ethical Perfection.

Nobody can attain it however (see Romans 5 for explanation). That's why we need Christ. It's the theology of the bible.

Arguing just to argue? 1) no one is forcing you to continue the debate and 2) I continue to make points, or would you rather I sit down and shut up?

What points? I've seen very little substantive and lot of vague assertions and smokescreens so far.

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



I did not mean that the words in the bible literally changed. The standard to which God holds his followers changed from the OT to the NT. Even how people interpret the Bible changed. The standard for Christianity changes. How can you argue that it hasn't?

God still holds people to the same standard. Moral and ethical Perfection.

Nobody can attain it however (see Romans 5 for explanation). That's why we need Christ. It's the theology of the bible.

Arguing just to argue? 1) no one is forcing you to continue the debate and 2) I continue to make points, or would you rather I sit down and shut up?

What points? I've seen very little substantive and lot of vague assertions and smokescreens so far.

If its all so vague then stop responding. I don't know what else to tell you. I obviously don't see the vagueness, so seems to me you're just being dismissive now.

 

[nutz]

No, no it's not.

That's why we have a system of checks and balances in our government. If a majority decides that blondes aren't allowed to vote and a bunch of states pass it, it can be overturned by the courts.

For your hypothetical example, my answer was correct according to my beliefs. I did not add anything to the question but what was presented. Also why I chose to use true democracy.
Part of the problem with our society, everyone wants to read into things. Face value is 0 because there has to be something hidden or politically corrected to get the right answer.

 

[nutz]

We are not a democracy but a Constitutional Republic.

Don't try to misquote. My reply was correct for the question given, nothing added, no interpretation for a true meaning of the question.

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

No, no it's not.

That's why we have a system of checks and balances in our government. If a majority decides that blondes aren't allowed to vote and a bunch of states pass it, it can be overturned by the courts.

For your hypothetical example, my answer was correct according to my beliefs. I did not add anything to the question but what was presented. Also why I chose to use true democracy.
Part of the problem with our society, everyone wants to read into things. Face value is 0 because there has to be something hidden or politically corrected to get the right answer.

So are you saying that the majority should always rule? Even if they're horribly wrong?

Or are you saying the courts should no longer have the power to make decisions?

Who said anything about being PC? My example was about voting rights and the OP is about a publicly funded institution supporting a specific religious doctrine; separation of church and state.

 

[Zguy28]

Wirelessly posted





So are you saying that the majority should always rule? Even if they're horribly wrong?

Or are you saying the courts should no longer have the power to make decisions?

Who said anything about being PC? My example was about voting rights and the OP is about a publicly funded institution supporting a specific religious doctrine; separation of church and state.

I believe he is picking on those who use the word democracy and then don't think it means majority rule, when in fact it does.

 

[UNA]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted





So are you saying that the majority should always rule? Even if they're horribly wrong?

Or are you saying the courts should no longer have the power to make decisions?

Who said anything about being PC? My example was about voting rights and the OP is about a publicly funded institution supporting a specific religious doctrine; separation of church and state.

I believe he is picking on those who use the word democracy and then don't think it means majority rule, when in fact it does.

It is unless the courts decide otherwise as in cases of discrimination. That's the point I'm trying to make.