Evidence for God from Science

Philip wrote:The argument that this coach was somehow leading prayers while he was still functioning in an official capacity as coach is beyond ludicrous! IF there is any question, there is a VERY simple solution. As soon as the team is released to leave, all the coach should have to say is: "OK, guys, team dismissed. And anyone wishing to remain for our group prayer, please meet at X location, as we'll begin in 5 minutes. And if you decline to attend that is totally fine. As this is completely voluntary and per your personal sensibilities, it is entirely up to whatever your personal wishes."

Yes, that is a simple solution, and I'm pretty sure it's legal, too. So yeah, he could have done that. He should have done that. If only he'd done that...

But he didn't.

Instead, with the support of an out-of-town conservative Christian advocacy group, he went and did precisely what he'd already been told he couldn't do. This is what I'm talking about when I rant about ridiculous manufactured controversies.

Abel: I believe teacher led prayer and bible reading should never have been removed from Public Schools

You DO, I hope, understand WHY I don't want teachers leading prayers during official school time. It's because 1) the "audience" is captive/must be there and 2) if this is official policy, that teachers can lead prayers DURING school, then WHO are they praying to? WHAT theological tradition or religious beliefs are they espousing? If it is a school-sanctioned activity, then there is a good possibility that the CONTENT is also sanctioned/vetted. Meaning, some entity/entities within the school system are controlling what should be a completely voluntary, spiritual and BIBLE-based activity. Who's to say some group with an agenda doesn't try to influence with New Age or some other unBiblical content? And my kid HAS to hear this. Or they might WANT to hear it but don't realize what they are hearing is perhaps unBiblical? See, the problem is you don't know who is planning the content, who is bringing forth proper teaching and things to pray/pray about, and who might be introducing dangerous or unScriptural influences.

BTW, corporate prayer is wonderful. But no LAW can keep someone from sitting in a class full of people and silently communicating their thoughts and desires to God. As the ONLY Person who is going to know THAT is - well, you know WHO!

Philip wrote: The argument that this coach was somehow leading prayers while he was still functioning in an official capacity as coach is beyond ludicrous! IF there is any question, there is a VERY simple solution. As soon as the team is released to leave, all the coach should have to say is: "OK, guys, team dismissed. And anyone wishing to remain for our group prayer, please meet at X location, as we'll begin in 5 minutes. And if you decline to attend that is totally fine. As this is completely voluntary and per your personal sensibilities, it is entirely up to whatever your personal wishes."

Edward: Yes, that is a simple solution, and I'm pretty sure it's legal, too. So yeah, he could have done that. He should have done that. If only he'd done that...

But he didn't.

Well, let's, for the moment, extract the indicated coach and controversy. Do you REALLY believe that my simple approach would be acceptable to radical secularist? Seriously, they'd NEVER accept THAT. The seem to see great danger or harm in it. Wonder why?

Philip wrote:Well, let's, for the moment, extract the indicated coach and controversy. Do you REALLY believe that my simple approach would be acceptable to radical secularist? Seriously, they'd NEVER accept THAT.

So? It's about following Constitutional law, not making everybody happy about everything all the time.

Philip wrote:
Well, let's, for the moment, extract the indicated coach and controversy. Do you REALLY believe that my simple approach would be acceptable to radical secularist? Seriously, they'd NEVER accept THAT.

Edward: So? It's about following Constitutional law, not making everybody happy about everything all the time.

Somehow, I didn't think you'd accept something simple that would satisfy this. What I suggest has been considered constitutionally fine for 200 years. What has changed?

Forget about being right with Uncle Sam and instead be content with being right with God.

Philip wrote:

Abel: I believe teacher led prayer and bible reading should never have been removed from Public Schools

You DO, I hope, understand WHY I don't want teachers leading prayers during official school time. It's because 1) the "audience" is captive/must be there and 2) if this is official policy, that teachers can lead prayers DURING school, then WHO are they praying to? WHAT theological tradition or religious beliefs are they espousing? If it is a school-sanctioned activity, then there is a good possibility that the CONTENT is also sanctioned/vetted. Meaning, some entity/entities within the school system are controlling what should be a completely voluntary, spiritual and BIBLE-based activity. Who's to say some group with an agenda doesn't try to influence with New Age or some other unBiblical content? And my kid HAS to hear this. Or they might WANT to hear it but don't realize what they are hearing is perhaps unBiblical? See, the problem is you don't know who is planning the content, who is bringing forth proper teaching and things to pray/pray about, and who might be introducing dangerous or unScriptural influences.

BTW, corporate prayer is wonderful. But no LAW can keep someone from sitting in a class full of people and silently communicating their thoughts and desires to God. As the ONLY Person who is going to know THAT is - well, you know WHO!

You do know that everday Congress opens with prayer to God but it is probably just a matter of time until it is taken away too and it was in Public schools too up until the 1960's.Why can the Politicians pray to God every morning but not students in Public School? I know we can pray anytime we want to anywhere but it is not the same.It is more important to have people acknowledge God.
George Washington " You can't have national morality apart from religious principle."
James Madison "We've staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart."
John Quincy Adams: "The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity."
Thomas Jefferson: "The God who gave us life gave us liberty... Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction... That these liberties are the gift of God? The bible is the cornerstone for American liberty."
Abraham Lincoln: But for this book we could not know right from wrong. I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.
George Washington: It is impossible to rightly govern the world without the Bible.
John Adams. June 21, 1776 "Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure, than they have it now, they may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty."

Yes, Abel, Congress does have a prayer - one that nowadays NEVER uses Jesus name. And the founding fathers you mention all believed in either God or a higher power. However, TWO of them, I wouldn't want LEADING my kids' prayers. Lincoln, is not proven to be a Christian, although he certainly believed in God. There is a thread of historical evidence that he intended to make his Christian faith public, but that is uncertain. Yes, both Lincoln and Jefferson thought Jesus of great moral importance. But Jefferson, who once wrote, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know," did not believe that Jesus was God. Ever hear of his "swiss cheese" Bible? The one he cut out all of the miraculous elements (things he viewed as being ("unscientific, and thus impossible")? So, I wouldn't want Jefferson leading the prayers.

Again, I'm not saying kids shouldn't be able to have a time to pray - perhaps they could optionally have either a quiet time at their desk or they could voluntarily attend a 15-minute prayer session - ELSEWHERE, and led by whomever so desires, AS LONG AS they aren't in any way instructed, sanctioned or vetted by the school for their content. So, it's a procedural thing as to how it might be done, to ONLY be voluntary, for the CHRISTIAN (and other) children who WANT to attend, to go elsewhere for a brief period before returning to the classroom with the ones who declined to go with them.

Also, if you implemented some system that allowed voluntary prayer DURING school, you would have to accommodate Muslims, Hindus - whatever kids wanted THEIR desired option of prayer style/deity lifted up.

Philip wrote:Yes, Abel, Congress does have a prayer - one that nowadays NEVER uses Jesus name. And the founding fathers you mention all believed in either God or a higher power. However, TWO of them, I wouldn't want LEADING my kids' prayers. Lincoln, is not proven to be a Christian, although he certainly believed in God. There is a thread of historical evidence that he intended to make his Christian faith public, but that is uncertain. Yes, both Lincoln and Jefferson thought Jesus of great moral importance. But Jefferson, who once wrote, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know," did not believe that Jesus was God. Ever hear of his "swiss cheese" Bible? The one he cut out all of the miraculous elements (things he viewed as being ("unscientific, and thus impossible")? So, I wouldn't want Jefferson leading the prayers and the ten commandments hanging on walls in the school too as a reminder.

Again, I'm not saying kids shouldn't be able to have a time to pray - perhaps they could optionally have either a quiet time at their desk or they could voluntarily attend a 15-minute prayer session - ELSEWHERE, and led by whomever so desires, AS LONG AS they aren't in any way instructed, sanctioned or vetted by the school for their content. So, it's a procedural thing as to how it might be done, to ONLY be voluntary, for the CHRISTIAN (and other) children who WANT to attend, to go elsewhere for a brief period before returning to the classroom with the ones who declined to go with them.

Also, if you implemented some system that allowed voluntary prayer DURING school, you would have to accommodate Muslims, Hindus - whatever kids wanted THEIR desired option of prayer style/deity lifted up.

None of that applied up until the 1960's so I don't see why it would be a problem today.I realize it is never going to happen but I do not believe it should have ever been removed.I know about the controversies with the founding fathers but imo it does not matter of Jefferson was a deist,he was only one,and I do not believe they were overly Christian but I do believe they believed in God and were Christians.I can't understand Christians thinking prayer and bible reading should have never been in Public Schools,it was for a reason.I realize we'll have to agree to disagree but I believe it was a good thing to pray to God every morning,say the pledge and read passages from the bible everyday,led by the teacher.

Philip wrote:Somehow, I didn't think you'd accept something simple that would satisfy this. What I suggest has been considered constitutionally fine for 200 years. What has changed?

What you suggest is still Constitutionally fine as far as I know, so if that's what you're referring to nothing has changed. The coach has the right to pray, lead prayers, preach the word, and so forth when he's off the clock. In this instance he was illegally leading a prayer while on the clock. School officials say they were unaware of the practice, but I doubt that's true. How can you possibly be unaware that a football coach is leading prayers on the field and has been for years? Hundreds of people must have seen it happen. I think it's more likely that they chose to ignore it until someone forced their hand. School administrators don't go looking for conflict.

If your question is broader - what was changed in the country to make it so that things that were once common occurrences are no longer okay - I think that it's an example of special privileges long taken for granted being challenged by people who don't get special privileges and don't think anyone else should, either. After a couple hundred years of struggle, strife, and negotiation it's become generally accepted that the word "men" in "all men are created equal" means "human beings" and that there are no additional qualifiers or special privileges. It's also become generally accepted that the separation of church and state exists and applies to all religions equally, with no special exceptions or loopholes. I think that's progress, but I can see how people who are accustomed to getting special privileges might disagree.

The separation of Church and State is nothing new, but the U.S. has always had a Christian majority and for some people being in the majority means that rules that apply to others don't apply to them. What we're seeing now is just push-back. Christianity should never have been granted special status, but it happened. Now other religions (and smart-aleck atheists looking to make a point) are demanding the same consideration. Moderate Christians mostly seem to see their point, but conservative Christians are in a bind. They can't argue that Christianity gets special status because they already lost that fight, and they're not willing to permit Satanist, Pagan, and Muslim displays next to their crosses, mangers, and Ten Commandments statues. The result has been a lot of confusion, frustration, and rage. I get how they'd feel that way, but they're wrong.

School-led prayer was never constitutional. Neither were Christian monuments outside courthouses. This is not, and never was, a Christian nation. It's a secular representative democracy. Our motto is not In God We Trust, it's E Pluribus Unum - Out of Many, One.

abelcainsbrother wrote:None of that applied up until the 1960's so I don't see why it would be a problem today.I realize it is never going to happen but I do not believe it should have ever been removed.I know about the controversies with the founding fathers but imo it does not matter of Jefferson was a deist,he was only one,and I do not believe they were overly Christian but I do believe they believed in God and were Christians.

Sure, a lot of them were Christians. And some of them weren't. But their personal beliefs don't really matter. Whether or not John Adams mentioned God in some letter to the Ambassador of Prussia is irrelevant. What matters is what they put into our Constitution. They could have made the United States a monarchy, or a Christian theocracy, or a Christian theocratic democracy of some sort, but they didn't. They made it a secular, representative democracy and they explicitly forbade giving special status to any specific religion.

edwardmurphy wrote:

Philip wrote:Somehow, I didn't think you'd accept something simple that would satisfy this. What I suggest has been considered constitutionally fine for 200 years. What has changed?

What you suggest is still Constitutionally fine as far as I know, so if that's what you're referring to nothing has changed. The coach has the right to pray, lead prayers, preach the word, and so forth when he's off the clock. In this instance he was illegally leading a prayer while on the clock. School officials say they were unaware of the practice, but I doubt that's true. How can you possibly be unaware that a football coach is leading prayers on the field and has been for years? Hundreds of people must have seen it happen. I think it's more likely that they chose to ignore it until someone forced their hand. School administrators don't go looking for conflict.

If your question is broader - what was changed in the country to make it so that things that were once common occurrences are no longer okay - I think that it's an example of special privileges long taken for granted being challenged by people who don't get special privileges and don't think anyone else should, either. After a couple hundred years of struggle, strife, and negotiation it's become generally accepted that the word "men" in "all men are created equal" means "human beings" and that there are no additional qualifiers or special privileges. It's also become generally accepted that the separation of church and state exists and applies to all religions equally, with no special exceptions or loopholes. I think that's progress, but I can see how people who are accustomed to getting special privileges might disagree.

The separation of Church and State is nothing new, but the U.S. has always had a Christian majority and for some people being in the majority means that rules that apply to others don't apply to them. What we're seeing now is just push-back. Christianity should never have been granted special status, but it happened. Now other religions (and smart-aleck atheists looking to make a point) are demanding the same consideration. Moderate Christians mostly seem to see their point, but conservative Christians are in a bind. They can't argue that Christianity gets special status because they already lost that fight, and they're not willing to permit Satanist, Pagan, and Muslim displays next to their crosses, mangers, and Ten Commandments statues. The result has been a lot of confusion, frustration, and rage. I get how they'd feel that way, but they're wrong.

School-led prayer was never constitutional. Neither were Christian monuments outside courthouses. This is not, and never was, a Christian nation. It's a secular representative democracy. Our motto is not In God We Trust, it's E Pluribus Unum - Out of Many, One.

Wrong! China is a secular country.You can look at it like Christians has special privileges they never should have had however despite the frustration that you think Christians now feel. There is another way to look at it and this is the way I look at it as a Christian and that is what we see happening is actually fulfilling bible prophecies for the last days and if you understand bible prophecy then you already know that this is just more bible prophecy being fulfilled that willlead to other bible prophecies being fulfilled like a one world government with Revised Rome ruling and not America,so America has to dwindle in power which is exactly what is happening and it is going to lead to no national sovereignty so that the one world government comes into power.We already have a global currency and if you have a cell phone on you,you are being tracked everywhere you go anywhere on the earth by GPS,now the mark of the beast system is not here yet,and the one world government will come before that,but when the anti-christ and false prophet finally comes to power and the mark of the beast system is put into place well just read it for yourself. Revelation 13:16-17 "And he causeth all,both small and great,rich and poor,free and bond,to recieve a mark in their right hand,or int heir foreheads:And that no man might buy or sell,save he that had the mark,or the name of the beast,or the number of his name."Resistance is futile! No matter where you are!

It is not going to be this atheist utopia atheists dream about,no their faith in atheism is going to be put to the test.Now if you have understanding then it is quite comforting to sit back and watch more of God's word be fulfilled.This is how I look at things but also like this too
You've got another king coming!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5syrhGwdM

em wrote:
School-led prayer was never constitutional. Neither were Christian monuments outside courthouses. This is not, and never was, a Christian nation. It's a secular representative democracy. Our motto is not In God We Trust, it's E Pluribus Unum - Out of Many, One.

What Christian monuments were outside courthouses?

If you're referring to 10 commandments monuments, those monuments represent biblical laws that our justice system was/is based on. The 10 commandments monuments are a historical monument. The 10 commandments never were Christian. They were given to Old Testament Israel.

Unless you're talking about some other Christian monument that I'm not aware of.
Do you want to change the history of our nation?

RickD wrote:What Christian monuments were outside courthouses?

If you're referring to 10 commandments monuments, those monuments represent biblical laws that our justice system was/is based on. The 10 commandments monuments are a historical monument. The 10 commandments never were Christian. They were given to Old Testament Israel.

Unless you're talking about some other Christian monument that I'm not aware of.
Do you want to change the history of our nation?

Nope, I was talking about the Ten Commandments. I'm aware that the Ten Commandments were given to the Jews, but it's a bit silly to act like they're not seen as an important piece of the Christian faith. It's not Jews protesting their removal, after all, and the historical significance argument wasn't even used until the religious significance argument got shot down.

As far as representing the Biblical laws our system was based on, that's a bit of a stretch. Our laws are influenced by Christianity, but they're also strongly influenced by the Magna Carta, English Common Law, the Roman Republic, and even the ancient Greeks. Beyond that, only four of the commandments even made it into our legal system, and all four of those were present in previous legal systems.

But there's no need to listen to me about any of that anyway, because the courts have spoken and that argument has been repeatedly shot down...

Also, here's an interesting article about how a lot of those statues came to be placed around the country.

Here, fify:
Also, here's an interesting biased article about how a lot of those statues came to be placed around the country.



If you're going to post articles like that, please don't criticize B. W. 's links.

Hardly an unbiased article, with a link to the Freedom from Religion Foundation.