minister of music 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I am a better man than homersapien. I am out of here. If the Mods can not see, then my protesting is doing nothing but adding the pleasure to types who pleasure in confusion and bigotry. War Eagle. I Quit AE, I can quit here if need be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMassie11 1,610 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Dude just give it a rest...all your doing is stirring up conflict. ..its one think to state an opinion and its another to mock someone's faith wether it be directly or indirectly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,373 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I am a better man than homersapien. I am out of here. If the Mods can not see, then my protesting is doing nothing but adding the pleasure to types who pleasure in confusion and bigotry. War Eagle. I Quit AE, I can quit here if need be. I am still trying to figure out specifically what you are protesting, other than opposing views on the subject. If you really find alternative views to be offensive, I don't blame you for leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,373 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Dude just give it a rest...all your doing is stirring up conflict. ..its one think to state an opinion and its another to mock someone's faith wether it be directly or indirectly Are you talking to me? If so, please show where I have mocked anyone's faith, even if indirectly, and I will apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie 124 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Well back to the topic ... really this is Tony Franklin trying jump on the "lets beat on Auburn" bandwagon. He has no credibility; he is a coach that put his system online/video to be purchased, everyone did, and it ruined his "career". On another note: I live in a building where there are many different religious beliefs/practices/sexual preferences/colors/shapes/etc, and I consider each and everyone of them great Auburn men and women. They make me a better person by just knowing them, and I will stand up for them any signal day of the week against anyone that thinks less of them. Having a different idea/belief/shape/preference/etc is what makes humanity beautiful, and it is something that makes the Auburn family shine. If the administration is too blinded to consider different people because of prejudices, then that is very disappointing. What does my opinion really matter though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Against my better judgment, I'm entering the fray... I am a better man than homersapien. Of all the things I've read on this thread (haven't read it all though), this statement might be the most offensive thing I've seen. As a fellow believer, I implore you with Philippians 2 to consider these words very carefully. One of the biggest things Jesus taught against was those who thought themselves better than others. Most of Christianity's problems stem from Christains believing themselves to be better than others. If anything, close communion with Jesus reveals to us just how disgusting we are, not how much better we are than other sinners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,598 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 This thread has stayed civil for far, far longer than I expected it to. I've read every post and fail to see where anyone's faith has been mocked or any person's beliefs insulted. It's been interesting so far. Keep up the good work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weegle777 78 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Do the right thing....Stop this stupid thread. No kidding. ..some of these remarks are very offensive I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weegle777 78 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in. Things change, and frankly, things get better. I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray. The SCOTUS didn't ban prayer in schools. Anyone who wants to pray is school is perfectly free to do so. What it banned is organized prayer initiated by those in a position of authority. I have already explained why this is inappropriate, although from your last sentence it is apparent you don't agree with my reasoning. I suspect even you would get a little uncomfortable if children had to sit through just any prayer (Islam, voo-doo, witchcraft). After all, your kids could remain "respectfully silent" instead of getting down and kneeling toward mecca with the rest of their peers. If you read my posts carefully, then you know how I feel about forced prayer. On the other hand, I find utterly rediculous that any group of people with common beliefs can't hold an organized prayer amongst themselves in a public school. Ever hear of "see you at the flagpole"? So why can't the prayer be led by a Christan teacher? Why is there no longer a prayer prior to Auburn football games? Because of a gross misinterpretation of the establishment clause, and the ignorance of people believing that the separation of church and state is in the constitution. Obviously, the SCOTUS - and a good many citizens - disagree. Still doesn't negate the true meaning of the establishment clause and what it was meant to represent by the writers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,598 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Do the right thing....Stop this stupid thread. No kidding. ..some of these remarks are very offensive I agree. Would you mind pointing out what you find offensive? I don't see anything, but then we may be looking at it from different perspectives. PS: This is not some sort of challenge, I'd seriously like to know what statements offended you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keesler 5,924 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I've seen nothing offensive. Of course, I realize this is a the freakin internet so I'm not easily offended by people that choose to visit here and post incognito. Thick skin is required when braving the dangerous waters of sports, political, or religious message boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weegle777 78 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Do the right thing....Stop this stupid thread. No kidding. ..some of these remarks are very offensive I agree. Would you mind pointing out what you find offensive? I don't see anything, but then we may be looking at it from different perspectives. PS: This is not some sort of challenge, I'd seriously like to know what statements offended you. I quoted the wrong posts. Proofread fail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stealthyfan 124 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I really don't care which religion if any one chooses. Just keep it real, personal and private Matthew 6:1-6 The KJV is a select group of writings chosen by a bunch more guys that generally reinforced their position of power over the masses. There's plenty more out there that tells a different story. So read what pleases you and your faith (using the collective 'you' here) but respect the choice of others . A zealot will not respect this personal and private choice is the point. This comment about the King James Bible shows an abysmal lack of knowledge about the word of God, and is totally without any merit concerning reinforced position of power over the masses. Recommend you more background study before making such groundless remarks. Nah. KJV is the the most accepted English translation of a select collection of stories which positioned the "ins" to remain in power. The words are by men, interpreted by men and transcribed by men. Since man is flawed, can anyone say this is the word of God? That's the power over the then uneducated masses. Not very groundless, just another objective view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I really don't care which religion if any one chooses. Just keep it real, personal and private Matthew 6:1-6 The KJV is a select group of writings chosen by a bunch more guys that generally reinforced their position of power over the masses. There's plenty more out there that tells a different story. So read what pleases you and your faith (using the collective 'you' here) but respect the choice of others . A zealot will not respect this personal and private choice is the point. This comment about the King James Bible shows an abysmal lack of knowledge about the word of God, and is totally without any merit concerning reinforced position of power over the masses. Recommend you more background study before making such groundless remarks. Nah. KJV is the the most accepted English translation of a select collection of stories which positioned the "ins" to remain in power. The words are by men, interpreted by men and transcribed by men. Since man is flawed, can anyone say this is the word of God? That's the power over the then uneducated masses. Not very groundless, just another objective view. The "ins"? Christianity was not a way to achieve power. True enough when Rome acknowledged Christianity as the official religion of the Empire The Nicean Council did indeed take some documented editorial priviliges but really not many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walker77 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I really don't care which religion if any one chooses. Just keep it real, personal and private Matthew 6:1-6 The KJV is a select group of writings chosen by a bunch more guys that generally reinforced their position of power over the masses. There's plenty more out there that tells a different story. So read what pleases you and your faith (using the collective 'you' here) but respect the choice of others . A zealot will not respect this personal and private choice is the point. This comment about the King James Bible shows an abysmal lack of knowledge about the word of God, and is totally without any merit concerning reinforced position of power over the masses. Recommend you more background study before making such groundless remarks. Nah. KJV is the the most accepted English translation of a select collection of stories which positioned the "ins" to remain in power. The words are by men, interpreted by men and transcribed by men. Since man is flawed, can anyone say this is the word of God? That's the power over the then uneducated masses. Not very groundless, just another objective view. Interesting, Post Modernist position presented here... Which brings up another perspective of just how far a teacher/coach can "legally" go with his religion... We have all heard a lot about the constitution protecting our freedom of religion... and by definition Christianity Is Not a personal, meditate on your navel, keep it to oneself, religious discipline, but rather an engagement and an impacting of the culture with the gospel of the kingdom, as defined by the Bible... So where did the current mantra, " People have a right to worship", come from? By definition this limits religion to the individual's religious expression primarily to church services, only. This is a serious redefinition of Christianity. Is it right to muzzle anyone's free speech and freedom of religion just because they are a coach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weegle777 78 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Where I believe most people are incorrect in saying that Christians should keep their beliefs to themselves is that they are ignorant, not stupid, but ignorant of the fact that when one gives his life to Jesus, following Jesus isn't a "part" of that person's life. It IS that person's life. A true follower of Jesus Christ doesn't put Him in a box reserved for a certain day, or a certain time slot. Jesus becomes that person's new identity. You no longer identify with your old self, you are crucified and raised in Christ and He is who you mirror the rest of your life. When a Godly man goes to work, coaches any sports team, or serves in government, Jesus is represented everywhere that person is. It is impossible to suppress the faith of Jesus Christ's true follower unless you kill that person or that person willingly lives a double life. One on Sunday and one through the week. All of that to say, if you are around me, you are in the presence of Jesus Christ. So neither you, nor any government official or document could ever shut me up. It's an impossibility unless you are willing to take my life. For to live is Christ, and to die is gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
war eagle6 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Where I believe most people are incorrect in saying that Christians should keep their beliefs to themselves is that they are ignorant, not stupid, but ignorant of the fact that when one gives his life to Jesus, following Jesus isn't a "part" of that person's life. It IS that person's life. A true follower of Jesus Christ doesn't put Him in a box reserved for a certain day, or a certain time slot. Jesus becomes that person's new identity. You no longer identify with your old self, you are crucified and raised in Christ and He is who you mirror the rest of your life. When a Godly man goes to work, coaches any sports team, or serves in government, Jesus is represented everywhere that person is. It is impossible to suppress the faith of Jesus Christ's true follower unless you kill that person or that person willingly lives a double life. One on Sunday and one through the week. All of that to say, if you are around me, you are in the presence of Jesus Christ. So neither you, nor any government official or document could ever shut me up. It's an impossibility unless you are willing to take my life. For to live is Christ, and to die is gain. Powerful! And so true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,598 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Where I believe most people are incorrect in saying that Christians should keep their beliefs to themselves is that they are ignorant, not stupid, but ignorant of the fact that when one gives his life to Jesus, following Jesus isn't a "part" of that person's life. It IS that person's life. A true follower of Jesus Christ doesn't put Him in a box reserved for a certain day, or a certain time slot. Jesus becomes that person's new identity. You no longer identify with your old self, you are crucified and raised in Christ and He is who you mirror the rest of your life. When a Godly man goes to work, coaches any sports team, or serves in government, Jesus is represented everywhere that person is. It is impossible to suppress the faith of Jesus Christ's true follower unless you kill that person or that person willingly lives a double life. One on Sunday and one through the week. All of that to say, if you are around me, you are in the presence of Jesus Christ. So neither you, nor any government official or document could ever shut me up. It's an impossibility unless you are willing to take my life. For to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But, friend, freedom of religion also means the right to freedom FROM religion, if that's what one chooses. You may have the personal right to shout it out all you want, but your right to do that stops at the ear of someone that doesn't want to hear it. That's one reason why the SCOTUS has ruled against administration-led and approved public prayer in schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weegle777 78 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Where I believe most people are incorrect in saying that Christians should keep their beliefs to themselves is that they are ignorant, not stupid, but ignorant of the fact that when one gives his life to Jesus, following Jesus isn't a "part" of that person's life. It IS that person's life. A true follower of Jesus Christ doesn't put Him in a box reserved for a certain day, or a certain time slot. Jesus becomes that person's new identity. You no longer identify with your old self, you are crucified and raised in Christ and He is who you mirror the rest of your life. When a Godly man goes to work, coaches any sports team, or serves in government, Jesus is represented everywhere that person is. It is impossible to suppress the faith of Jesus Christ's true follower unless you kill that person or that person willingly lives a double life. One on Sunday and one through the week. All of that to say, if you are around me, you are in the presence of Jesus Christ. So neither you, nor any government official or document could ever shut me up. It's an impossibility unless you are willing to take my life. For to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But, friend, freedom of religion also means the right to freedom FROM religion, if that's what one chooses. You may have the personal right to shout it out all you want, but your right to do that stops at the ear of someone that doesn't want to hear it. That's one reason why the SCOTUS has ruled against administration-led and approved public prayer in schools. You might have taken that out of context or I just didn't explain it very well. I didn't mean shut me up because I would be in everybody's face, because I would never force my beliefs on anyone. I meant it as I would never be forcefully shut up by government or told to never speak of my faith. Sorry for not clarifying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stealthyfan 124 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Where I believe most people are incorrect in saying that Christians should keep their beliefs to themselves is that they are ignorant, not stupid, but ignorant of the fact that when one gives his life to Jesus, following Jesus isn't a "part" of that person's life. It IS that person's life. A true follower of Jesus Christ doesn't put Him in a box reserved for a certain day, or a certain time slot. Jesus becomes that person's new identity. You no longer identify with your old self, you are crucified and raised in Christ and He is who you mirror the rest of your life. When a Godly man goes to work, coaches any sports team, or serves in government, Jesus is represented everywhere that person is. It is impossible to suppress the faith of Jesus Christ's true follower unless you kill that person or that person willingly lives a double life. One on Sunday and one through the week. All of that to say, if you are around me, you are in the presence of Jesus Christ. So neither you, nor any government official or document could ever shut me up. It's an impossibility unless you are willing to take my life. For to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But, friend, freedom of religion also means the right to freedom FROM religion, if that's what one chooses. You may have the personal right to shout it out all you want, but your right to do that stops at the ear of someone that doesn't want to hear it. That's one reason why the SCOTUS has ruled against administration-led and approved public prayer in schools. +1 Define religion. Mine is different from 777's (interesting run of numbers there bub). But the thread asks a question that cannot be answered as evidenced with the responses here. This is the Bible belt, so it will be more visible than a West Coast school, but too visible? A coach still can be very religious in the private arena without including the university in the public arena - say on camera as a university representative. There is a middle ground, and I bet the PR group at the university has a set of guidelines since they have guidelines for everything Auburn . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,373 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in. Things change, and frankly, things get better. I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray. The SCOTUS didn't ban prayer in schools. Anyone who wants to pray is school is perfectly free to do so. What it banned is organized prayer initiated by those in a position of authority. I have already explained why this is inappropriate, although from your last sentence it is apparent you don't agree with my reasoning. I suspect even you would get a little uncomfortable if children had to sit through just any prayer (Islam, voo-doo, witchcraft). After all, your kids could remain "respectfully silent" instead of getting down and kneeling toward mecca with the rest of their peers. If you read my posts carefully, then you know how I feel about forced prayer. On the other hand, I find utterly rediculous that any group of people with common beliefs can't hold an organized prayer amongst themselves in a public school. Ever hear of "see you at the flagpole"? So why can't the prayer be led by a Christan teacher? Why is there no longer a prayer prior to Auburn football games? Because of a gross misinterpretation of the establishment clause, and the ignorance of people believing that the separation of church and state is in the constitution. Obviously, the SCOTUS - and a good many citizens - disagree. Still doesn't negate the true meaning of the establishment clause and what it was meant to represent by the writers. Obviously the SCOTUS - and a good many citizens - disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keesler 5,924 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I have a question for the OP if he's still hanging around. What evidence is present at this time that suggests that the CURRENT coaching staff is pressing God and religion on the CURRENT football players? The original article posted was way back in the Tubs/Franklin days. We've had two new coaches + a steady turnover on the roster and at the OC position since then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I have a question for the OP if he's still hanging around. What evidence is present at this time that suggests that the CURRENT coaching staff is pressing God and religion on the CURRENT football players? The original article posted was way back in the Tubs/Franklin days. We've had two new coaches + a steady turnover on the roster and at the OC position since then. This is an agenda driven thread by those who simply do not like any acknowledgement of religious faith at anytime, ever, period! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,373 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I really don't care which religion if any one chooses. Just keep it real, personal and private Matthew 6:1-6 The KJV is a select group of writings chosen by a bunch more guys that generally reinforced their position of power over the masses. There's plenty more out there that tells a different story. So read what pleases you and your faith (using the collective 'you' here) but respect the choice of others . A zealot will not respect this personal and private choice is the point. This comment about the King James Bible shows an abysmal lack of knowledge about the word of God, and is totally without any merit concerning reinforced position of power over the masses. Recommend you more background study before making such groundless remarks. Nah. KJV is the the most accepted English translation of a select collection of stories which positioned the "ins" to remain in power. The words are by men, interpreted by men and transcribed by men. Since man is flawed, can anyone say this is the word of God? That's the power over the then uneducated masses. Not very groundless, just another objective view. Interesting, Post Modernist position presented here... Which brings up another perspective of just how far a teacher/coach can "legally" go with his religion... We have all heard a lot about the constitution protecting our freedom of religion... and by definition Christianity Is Not a personal, meditate on your navel, keep it to oneself, religious discipline, but rather an engagement and an impacting of the culture with the gospel of the kingdom, as defined by the Bible... So where did the current mantra, " People have a right to worship", come from? By definition this limits religion to the individual's religious expression primarily to church services, only. This is a serious redefinition of Christianity. Is it right to muzzle anyone's free speech and freedom of religion just because they are a coach? Has anyone suggested that anyone else be "muzzled"? Is suggesting that people avoid religious proselytization in inappropriate venues really "muzzling" them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,373 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I have a question for the OP if he's still hanging around. What evidence is present at this time that suggests that the CURRENT coaching staff is pressing God and religion on the CURRENT football players? The original article posted was way back in the Tubs/Franklin days. We've had two new coaches + a steady turnover on the roster and at the OC position since then. This is an agenda driven thread by those who simply do not like any acknowledgement of religious faith at anytime, ever, period! Not true. That is a simplistic statement with a tinge of paranoid xenophobia. And as far as I know, the current staff have done nothing that might spark a thread such as this. But I agree with the people - including the Oregon fans - who felt Chizik's comments after the NC game were inappropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.