Baptisms at the Athletics Complex

[TexasTiger 12,962]

10 minutes ago, DAG said:

And this has been discussed at great length with some quality points. You added zero to the discussion with any of your trivial content. You went from converting during work time to why do we have chaplains? , finally to should we have ritual ceremonies on Auburn property? Those are theee distinctive talking points. Truthfully, you have zero point. 

You’re brilliant.

[Grumps 3,704]

1 hour ago, selias said:

The theory of evolution is well tested and documented.

You know that evolution does not explain your consciousness.

How do you explain the fact that millions and millions of people since the beginning of recorded history have claimed to have an actual encounter with a supernatural God? People of many different backgrounds and languages have identical stories.

I used to be at least as skeptical as you are, but when God revealed Himself to me I had no choice but to know Him. I am a scientist. What should a scientist do in my situation? Reject the God who revealed Himself to me because science cannot prove Him? Rejecting my own observation would not be scientific at all, would it?

[aujeff11 6,243]

3 hours ago, aujeff11 said:

Very often, you’ll see recruit’s twitter pages with bible verses and biblical quotes. I don’t see religion in the locker room as a bad thing. It’s more of locker room culture thing for some anyway. 

IE:  I look on Twitter for the first time today and see that a big time Mississippi recruit Jaren Handy loved him some coach G. So I click on his profile and Hardy’s pinned tweet is: 

It becomes very easy to see why our coaches are not afraid to talk openly about religion. 

[toddc 13,194]

1 hour ago, selias said:

The theory of evolution is well tested and documented.

 

1 hour ago, selias said:

The theory of evolution is well tested and documented.

How exactly do you test evolution? It’s a theory too, by the way! It can’t be scientifically proven because it’s not repeatable!

[selias 2,398]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

You know that evolution does not explain your consciousness.

How do you explain the fact that millions and millions of people since the beginning of recorded history have claimed to have an actual encounter with a supernatural God? People of many different backgrounds and languages have identical stories.

I used to be at least as skeptical as you are, but when God revealed Himself to me I had no choice but to know Him. I am a scientist. What should a scientist do in my situation? Reject the God who revealed Himself to me because science cannot prove Him? Rejecting my own observation would not be scientific at all, would it?

People claim to see UFOs, Sasquatch, Loch Ness Monster, etc.. it doesn't mean I believe them either. Eyewitness reports are not as reliable as their reputation claims.

[selias 2,398]

1 hour ago, toddc said:

 

How exactly do you test evolution? It’s a theory too, by the way! It can’t be scientifically proven because it’s not repeatable!

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses."

https://www.nap.edu/read/6024/chapter/2#2

 

Without using Einstein's theory of general relativity, GPS satellites would be useless....but it's just a theory, right?

[gctiger 937]

7 hours ago, RunInRed said:

EAMC was also founded as a college that didn’t accept women or African Americans.

I’m aware of that but doubt they were the only ones.  Things were much different in those days.  

[toddc 13,194]

22 minutes ago, selias said:

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses."

https://www.nap.edu/read/6024/chapter/2#2

 

Without using Einstein's theory of general relativity, GPS satellites would be useless....but it's just a theory, right?

How do you test evolution? You seemed to have skipped over my main question!

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

That determines what’s right?

No it just says you are in a little minority of the Auburn Family.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Some folks are too emotional to reason and can’t follow argument.

Spoken by someone with a low tolerance level for those disagree wit him.

[selias 2,398]

9 minutes ago, toddc said:

How do you test evolution? You seemed to have skipped over my main question!

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#e1

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 hours ago, selias said:

If we're going back to the very origins of life on this planet, I'd look to biochemistry before jumping to a deity.

Not sure why. Who "created" biochemistry and allowed man to learn about it? Beyond this little planet, who created the universe that we can now see billions of light years into thanks to the Hubble Telescope?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

6 hours ago, Barnacle said:

I agree. I just think it gets difficult when you move past something as demonstrable as a baptism, to speech about one's faith. 

To me, the baptism presents less problems than someone like Chette on staff does. But, I also don't have any clear picture as to what Chette's exact role is within the program. Are players ever referred to him? It's one thing if a player says, "I want to talk to Chette." It's another thing if players are being referred to Chette by coaches and/or other paid staff members. For instance, if someone's family member dies, are they told to speak with Chette?

No one is ever forced too see Chette. The players KNOW he is there for them if they need him or just want to talk about something.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 hours ago, selias said:

So, we're back to the Big Bang? As I stated earlier in the thread, I find cosmology and theoretical physics interesting but, I'm far too much of a layman to try and explain it.

I bet you would have a hard time with advanced math where you use imaginary numbers.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=imaginary+numbers&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

[selias 2,398]

2 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Not sure why. Who "created" biochemistry and allowed man to learn about it? Beyond this little planet, who created the universe that we can now see billions of light years into thanks to the Hubble Telescope?

Currently the best explanations surrounding the origin of our universe are within the realm of cosmology & theoretical physics and they're constantly evolving as new evidence appears.. There is no "who".

[MaxP 137]

9 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

I respect your view but it looks like the vast majority of posters in the thread disagree with you and Red.

And I'm willing to bet those that do are overwhelmingly self described Christians. I value the separation of church and state almost as much as freedom of speech. Holding a baptism in an athletic building is a tacit endorsement of a religion. 

[selias 2,398]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

I bet you would have a hard time with advanced math where you use imaginary numbers.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=imaginary+numbers&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

I've made no secret that I am not a math whiz. I vaguely remember imaginary numbers from a couple of math classes. There's a reason I was a MIS major

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

I bet you would have a hard time with advanced math where you use imaginary numbers.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=imaginary+numbers&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

I know I would.  My daughter is doing that mess in math and I've reached the outer limits of my ability to help with homework now.

[TexasTiger 12,962]

14 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

No it just says you are in a little minority of the Auburn Family.

Nothing says family like someone saying you’re insignificant.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

4 hours ago, Barnacle said:

That being said, there are plenty of problems presented by Chette's role. I just don't know enough about that role to form my own opinions as to whether the role is appropriately defined, or whether he is acting within appropriate bounds. Its a tricky issue, and there is probably a lot of gray area.

 

What are the problems? And how can you be concerned about these "problems" if you know how his role is defined to have an opinion?

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Nothing says family like someone saying you’re insignificant.

I didn't say you were insignificant, just in the minority. God made you and He don't make no junk.

[selias 2,398]

3 minutes ago, MaxP said:

And I'm willing to bet those that do are overwhelmingly self described Christians. I value the separation of church and state almost as much as freedom of speech. Holding a baptism in an athletic building is a tacit endorsement of a religion. 

Despite my posts in this thread, I actually don't really have much of a problem with it. If players aren't required to attend I don't see it as a tacit endorsement of anything. Where do the athletes spend a good bit of their time? I'd wager it's in the athletic buildings.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

AU attends to the health needs of its athletes, so if they want to bring in a hygienist, makes sense. But if I’m a high school coach and a player tells me he wants to be baptized, I connect him to the minister of his choosing for that to happen in the normal course of how that church meets that request.

You don't have to even belong or go to church to be accept Jesus as your Savior. And to a lot of young men, coaches have a much bigger influence than a minister.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

53 minutes ago, selias said:

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses."

https://www.nap.edu/read/6024/chapter/2#2

 

Without using Einstein's theory of general relativity, GPS satellites would be useless....but it's just a theory, right?

Einstein's theory has been proven with deep space astronomy.

[selias 2,398]

6 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Whta does Einstein's theroy have to do wits GPS?

Due to general relativity, the clocks in the satellites are slower than the clocks on earth. Without making corrections to those clocks, GPS positioning would be inaccurate. Let me dig up a link for you. It's really kinda cool

Here you go.

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html