Praying Before Game WILL NOT BE STOPPED AT UT (merged)

#776
#776
Ashevolle said:
I don't have faith that a plane will not crash if I get on it. I know that planes do crash. Instead, I assess the risk and accept that the likelihood of me dying is low and therefore risk my life in an effort to be able to get where I'm going.
Click to expand...

Plus, you've actually seen how planes work, as well as chairs.
 
#778
#778
Slydell said:
Who created God? Man?
Click to expand...

No one. He is infinite. Since time and space are interconnected, time was created when space was. Meaning, the Creator is timeless, having no beginning nor end.

The uncaused cause that the laws of cause and effect dictate must exist.
 
#779
#779
He hasn't answered our prayers for the past couple of seasons...maybe he likes Muschamp.


Point is: I know we need to pray for safety of our players and those watching the game...(this is a little forward and kind of egging on the hard-headed folk out there) but players get hurt regardless of us praying before a game or not (see Bryan Randolph)...GOD doesn't care about football. Haven't seen a miracle worked in that stadium since I've ever been there.


The inverse of this...He works in mysterious ways....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#780
#780
utvolpj said:
Muslims don't enjoy football? I used to watch games with an Auburn fan that was a Muslim and he seemed quite sincere
Click to expand...

Wait....you watched football with an auburn fan.....that discredited everything you have said
 
#781
#781
MiramarVol said:
Without the Old Testament, you don't have a New Testament. The purpose of the OT was to point the coming of Jesus, thus a new covenant. The Midianites, Amelikites, Edomites, and Canaanites etc. all were killed because they were worshiping other gods, and denying the commandments of God, while living unholy lives. Nothing more.
Click to expand...

The thing that gets me about the new covenant argument is that each covenant purports to be universal law. The fact of the matter is, however, you can't have two universal moral laws, even if they apply to different periods of human existence. By its very definition, a universal law applies to all time for everyone. Once a universal law is put in place, it cannot be changed. The new covenant argument implies that humans before Christ were held to a different standard than those after him. This doesn't make any sense to me, at least, and certainly doesn't sound fair.

And I know the rationalization for this new covenant: that we're humans and we don't understand the ways of God. Ok, fine.
 
#782
#782
If they take it out I'm not going to be mad because I can still pray in my own time. Some people just think taking it out is disrespectful, but at the same time some atheists might find it disrespectful to them. A moment of silence would work just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#783
#783
PowerSweep said:
wow...the irony is funny...the universe can't just have always been there but a magical god can come from nothing...gotcha
Click to expand...

The most widely accepted scientific cosmological theories indicate a finite Universe. The mathematical theories point back to a beginning.

The basis of philosophy that the scientific practices are built upon indicate that the Universe must have a beginning. (i.e. It is impossible to traverse an infinite number of things. Thus, if the Universe was infinitely old, we would have to had traversed an infinite number of moments to get to the moment I wrote that sentence. Thus, there could not have been an infinite number of moments.)

The very fact of the existence of the "natural" is indicative of the existence of the "supernatural".

Not ironic at all... It's actually quite logical.

:hi:
 
#784
#784
volprof said:
So, in other words, we don't have free will? I'm confused.
Click to expand...

Consequences do not negate free will.

The sovereign law of the US and its various states post speed limits.

You are free to either obey or disobey.

They are free to convict based upon their sovereignty and your choice to disobey.
 
#785
#785
This is America and the majority rules. When is being politically correct going to stop. If you are an atheist and don't like the prayer, don't participate. Simple isn't it. Atheist do not believe in an after life, so quit griping and upseting your only life. I for one enjoy the prayer before a game. Last year my daughter was dying at Vanderbilt, doctors told us there was no hope but through prayer----prayer worked and my daughter is alive today. There is a God, I saw his miracle, not medicine or science, but God's.

We as a country need to quit catering to a few whether its Athist or Islam. This is America and the Great State of Tennessee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#786
#786
volprof said:
The thing that gets me about the new covenant argument is that each covenant purports to be universal law. The fact of the matter is, however, you can't have two universal moral laws, even if they apply to different periods of human existence. By its very definition, a universal law applies to all time for everyone. Once a universal law is put in place, it cannot be changed. The new covenant argument implies that humans before Christ were held to a different standard than those after him. This doesn't make any sense to me, at least, and certainly doesn't sound fair.

And I know the rationalization for this new covenant: that we're humans and we don't understand the ways of God. Ok, fine.
Click to expand...

Quote me a verse where the various covenants claim to be universal. Each covenant was given to specific people, at specific times. Short of pre or postscripts that say: "Now, listen. This is for everyone, forever." I'm not sure I'm following you.

God gave specific covenant to Noah.
He gave specific covenant to Abraham.
Likewise to Israel.
Likewise to the church.

God chose to lay His plan for humanity out strategically, and in phases. A detailed study of the OT and NT, as a whole, makes this clear since the entirety of the Bible speaks unto itself.

:hi:

Edit: And no, the rationalization for the new covenant is not that we can't understand the mind of God. The rationalization for the new covenant is that the old covenant was instituted to prove that we couldn't keep it, so that we would turn to the Grace of God through the completed work of Christ. And, having turned to Him, be transformed to His image and begin upholding the law by loving God and our neighbor.

Again: :hi:
 
Last edited:
#788
#788
If we would let a Church of Christ minister lead the prayer before the Bama game, I think we will win!
 
#790
#790
Orange_Crush said:
Consequences do not negate free will.

The sovereign law of the US and its various states post speed limits.

You are free to either obey or disobey.

They are free to convict based upon their sovereignty and your choice to disobey.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but if we really have free will, then we don't have room for a notion such as God's will - otherwise, free will is merely the byproduct of God's intentions. I realize, however, that not all Christian theology buys into something such as God's will and not all buy into free will. Most American Protestants (man and woman in the street; not actual theologists) tend to believe in both, or at least it seems that way to me. Such a concept doesn't make any sense. I'm not a theologists though, so maybe I just don't get it, although the fact that it's been such a debatable topic for thousands of years probably suggest no one else gets it either.
 
#792
#792
Orange_Crush said:
The most widely accepted scientific cosmological theories indicate a finite Universe. The mathematical theories point back to a beginning.

The basis of philosophy that the scientific practices are built upon indicate that the Universe must have a beginning. (i.e. It is impossible to traverse an infinite number of things. Thus, if the Universe was infinitely old, we would have to had traversed an infinite number of moments to get to the moment I wrote that sentence. Thus, there could not have been an infinite number of moments.)

The very fact of the existence of the "natural" is indicative of the existence of the "supernatural".

Not ironic at all... It's actually quite logical.

:hi:
Click to expand...

This is just completely incorrect - I would suggest this for a primer - A Brief History of Time: Stephen Hawking: 9780553380163: Amazon.com: Books

there is also an illustrated updated version you could try

see the chapter on time and why it doesnt make sense to even discuss time prior to the event of the big bang
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#793
#793
Orange_Crush said:
Quote me a verse where the various covenants claim to be universal. Each covenant was given to specific people, at specific times. Short of pre or postscripts that say: "Now, listen. This is for everyone, forever." I'm not sure I'm following you.

God gave specific covenant to Noah.
He gave specific covenant to Abraham.
Likewise to Israel.
Likewise to the church.

God chose to lay His plan for humanity out strategically, and in phases. A detailed study of the OT and NT, as a whole, makes this clear since the entirety of the Bible speaks unto itself.

:hi:

Edit: And no, the rationalization for the new covenant is not that we can't understand the mind of God. The rationalization for the new covenant is that the old covenant was instituted to prove that we couldn't keep it, so that we would turn to the Grace of God through the completed work of Christ. And, having turned to Him, be transformed to His image and begin upholding the law by loving God and our neighbor.

Again: :hi:
Click to expand...

I'll commend you for knowing your covenants, but you don't see a problem with any of this, even if they are for specific times, peoples, and places? And I admit that the Old Testament covenant doesn't appear universal, because the only people that mattered were Jews. I think the acceptance of Christ's teachings, by nature, requires universal law, does it not? Otherwise, what is the point of it? A religion like Christianity is useless if it is not universal, otherwise there is no point for everyone (or even anyone) to follow Christ's teachings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#794
#794
WinchesterVol said:
This is America and the majority rules. When is being politically correct going to stop. If you are an atheist and don't like the prayer, don't participate. Simple isn't it. Atheist do not believe in an after life, so quit griping and upseting your only life. I for one enjoy the prayer before a game. Last year my daughter was dying at Vanderbilt, doctors told us there was no hope but through prayer----prayer worked and my daughter is alive today. There is a God, I saw his miracle, not medicine or science, but God's.

We as a country need to quit catering to a few whether its Athist or Islam. This is America and the Great State of Tennessee.
Click to expand...

:crazy:

Where is god when others are praying to stay alive? Did you just pray harder? Or does he just care more about you and your family?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#795
#795
Orange_Crush said:
No one. He is infinite. Since time and space are interconnected, time was created when space was. Meaning, the Creator is timeless, having no beginning nor end.

The uncaused cause that the laws of cause and effect dictate must exist.
Click to expand...

The laws of cause and effect would suggest that God is not uncaused but is the effect of some other cause.
 
#796
#796
volprof said:
Fair enough, but if we really have free will, then we don't have room for a notion such as God's will - otherwise, free will is merely the byproduct of God's intentions. I realize, however, that not all Christian theology buys into something such as God's will and not all buy into free will. Most American Protestants (man and woman in the street; not actual theologists) tend to believe in both, or at least it seems that way to me. Such a concept doesn't make any sense. I'm not a theologists though, so maybe I just don't get it, although the fact that it's been such a debatable topic for thousands of years probably suggest no one else gets it either.
Click to expand...

Well, we do have to remember that we are finite beings discussing infinite concepts (if you look at it from the Christian theological perspective, that is, since we believe that God is infinitely intelligent, powerful, etc...). I would not believe in any God that I could completely comprehend.

The Bible does not teach a schism between the concepts of God's will and man's free will. Any impossibility between the two is rooted in philosophy.

The Bible teaches that God is infinitely powerful.

It teaches that He is infinitely intelligent and knowing.

It teaches that God is outside of time, thus isn't surprised by any decision ever made.

It teaches that God has an overall will that can not be thwarted.

It teaches that He has a will that he allows to be thwarted, out of respect for man's free will (because can love and true relationship ever exist without free will?)

So, God allows man to choose his own destiny, out of respect for His creation. But His overall wish is for everyone to be freed from the penalty of death through sin. So, He sent His Son to take that penalty and offer salvation through grace/faith.

He revealed Himself in such a way that he can be discerned and known, yet with plausible deniability to allow free will.

He is powerful and intelligent enough to make all things work out according to His divine plan that those who would respond to His message will respond to His message.

Back to the US sovereignty illustration.

Just because people speed does not mean that the lawmakers aren't sovereign. Nor does it mean that their desire is anything except for people to abide by the posted speed limit.
 
#797
#797
Ashevolle said:
The laws of cause and effect would suggest that God is not uncaused but is the effect of some other cause.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that we could be one tiny atom in the fingernail of some other giant being? I can see that
 
#798
#798
#799
#799
Ashevolle said:
The laws of cause and effect would suggest that God is not uncaused but is the effect of some other cause.
Click to expand...

The laws of cause and effect are rooted in the concept of sequential time. The cause of sequential time can not be sequential time. The cause of sequential time must transcend sequential time. Thus, the cause of sequential time need not have a cause, since there could, by definition, not have been anything 'before' the cause of sequential time.

Whatever caused the Universe is by definition 'supernatural' (i.e. transcending nature). It is the only solution for the universe as we know it since:

From nothing, nothing comes.
The Universe is something.
Something outside of the constraints of our natural laws must have caused the 'something' that we experience as the natural universe.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top