# Let's put God back in our schools.



## DA REEL DADDY (Jun 7, 2005)

http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/petitions/best-way-to-stop-school-shootings

If God is not allowed in our schools, will we ever find real peace?

Sign petition to put God back in our schools

You already know about the tragedy in Florida, right?

Where a crazed gunman killed 17 innocent people -- mostly students -- at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

What will stop these shootings from reoccurring?

Some say "more gun control." Others say schools should have airport security. With armed guards and armed teachers. Or more psychiatrists. Or better FBI follow up.

But few mention God.

Few have the courage to say...

As long as God is expelled from our schools and our culture, peace is only a pipe-dream.

But there is good news: The Florida House of Representatives just passed a bill that calls for every school in the state to display a sign, reading: "In God we trust."

If the Florida Legislature approves the measure, this will be a victory.

So please:

Click here to urge Florida's Legislature to approve the bill.

You see, prayer was common in schools up until 1963. But not any more -- because of the Godless activism of the ACLU and other radical atheists groups that want to totally erase God from daily life.

Rep. Kimberly Daniels who sponsored the bill to put "In God we trust" in every school in Florida, said: God is the light. And "our schools need light in them like never before."

According to the Tampa Bay Times, Rep. Daniels said:

"We cannot put God in a closet when the issues we face are bigger than us."

Hopefully this effort will spread to every state in the union.

After you sign your petition to put God back in schools, please send this alert to everyone you know who might be willing to join this noble campaign.

With Christ as King, there is true hope.

With God, indeed, true peace can reign in the family and society.

Thank you for fighting the good fight.

John Ritchie
TFP Student Action, Director
www.tfpstudentaction.org


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

*All powerful*

If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.


----------



## DA REEL DADDY (Jun 7, 2005)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.


What she said,



Spirit said:


> Preventing the mention of God's name does not take him out of the schools anymore than removing the Ten Commandments makes them any less of God's law. God's law is for 100% of the world, whether they choose to believe it is their choice but the law still applies to them. God is everywhere, not allowing public prayer or His word to be read in the classroom does not mean that God is not there. Man has no control over God and never will.


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.


Why do you concern yourself with other's beliefs? No one is making you click on the FFTS section.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

*FYI*



atcfisherman said:


> Why do you concern yourself with other's beliefs? No one is making you click on the FFTS section.


I like to keep tabs on anyone with an unfounded belief system. This way , I use the info I gleen from your posts, as ammunition when discussing these matters with others.


----------



## jetbuilt (May 4, 2010)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.


Excellent question.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.


God is still there we have the free will to accept Him or deny Him. We can choose to live in the flesh or the spirit.



CTone said:


> I like to keep tabs on anyone with an unfounded belief system. This way , I use the info I gleen from your posts, as ammunition when discussing these matters with others.


What kind of ammo you looking for? I might have some.:smile:


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

Living in the flesh? What does that mean? Are you assuming that non-believers have no moral constructs? Do you think that atheists and agnostics donâ€™t have marriages, children, social skills. We are just like you, except for the unfounded, irrational belief in a intervening, all powerful, evil deity.


----------



## DA REEL DADDY (Jun 7, 2005)

CTone said:


> Living in the flesh? What does that mean? *Are you assuming that non-believers have no moral constructs? Do you think that atheists and agnostics donâ€™t have marriages, children, social skills. We are just like you, except for the unfounded, irrational belief in a intervening, all powerful, evil deity.[*/QUOTE]
> 
> I don't know where or who is suggesting that someone here is implying that non believers have no moral conduct. Two of my best friends are or where non-believers. (One past away from an accident about a year ago, funny thing, his family had his funeral at a church.)
> 
> ...


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

CTone said:


> Living in the flesh? What does that mean? Are you assuming that non-believers have no moral constructs? Do you think that atheists and agnostics donâ€™t have marriages, children, social skills. We are just like you, except for the unfounded, irrational belief in a intervening, all powerful, evil deity.


Yes that is what I'm saying. The Bible gives of an ABSOLUTE of what is right or wrong. Outside of God there is no absolute. What you may see as right is not the same as what someone else may see as right. 
Define Irrational belief. Look at the world and everything in it. Some explosion created the world and man was created from primordial sludge that some thing crawled out of and evolved into man. Now that takes some faith to believe some man made lie. Here's a hint look into DNA studies. They now have even the most devout evolutionist and atheist scientist saying INTELLIGENT DESIGN but they can not believe God did it so they claim aliens did it. LOL Now that some faith. Have a Blessed day I know you need it.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

Quoting the bible does nothing for me. I do not accept it as â€œinspired word of godâ€, for many reasons.

Providing personal anecdotes does nothing to prove the existence of any supernatural being(s).

Using statements similar to â€œit takes more faith to believe in evolution and scienceâ€ shows a lack of understanding for science.
scientific practicesâ€"observation and experiment; the development of falsifiable hypotheses; the relentless questioning of established viewsâ€"have proven uniquely powerful in revealing the surprising, underlying structure of the world we live in, including subatomic particles, the role of germs in the spread of disease, and the neural basis of mental life.
Religion has no equivalent record of discovering hidden truths.
I continue to use these and other statements by the â€œfaithfulâ€ to strengthen my purpose to get friends and family to accept the real truth; that there is no evidence for a creator god, nor is there really any purpose.


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

Well CTone show me unbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no God. You can't because none exist. While there is overwhelming evidence of an Intelligent Designer. You have to have faith to believe in evolution, you have to have faith to believe scientist are not motivated by some agenda in their "findings". I choose to have faith in God. Man hasn't convinced me otherwise and it is not possible because no matter how long they strive to take God out of the position of The Creator they can't because He is the Truth and every man is a liar. Put that in your heart and ponder on it. Take Care.


----------



## bzrk180 (Jan 7, 2008)

I am not sure how an all encompassing God that created EVERYTHING and controls everything can be discharged from any place or any person because the "rules" say he isn't allowed?

So in your reasoning, God is a construct of man and is controlled by man and is only allowed where man says he is allowed???


I get so confused in these conversations.... I mean God was in that Church that was shot up, right? He was allowed in that Amish school that was targeted, right? 

I really dont think this is the solution...


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

â€œunbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no godâ€
the premise of the argument is both flawed and ridiculous. *The failure to disprove something does not constitute proof of its existence*.

The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim, especially in cases where the claims are unsupported or un-falsifiable. With no enduring evidence that a God exists, there is simply no reason to believe in a deity, even if it's not possible to irrefutably disprove his existence.

Many thought experiments have been created to show the absurdity of these claims, such as the Invisible Pink Unicorn, Carl Sagan's "The Dragon in My Garage," Russell's Teapot or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. All of which are absurd claims without evidence and yet impossible to disprove. Familiarizing yourself with these thought experiments can give you a clear picture of exactly why the burden of proof should always be on the person making a claim.

Duckchasr, you claim overwhelming evidence of an intelligent designer, would you provide this evidence?


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

CTone said:


> Quoting the bible does nothing for me. I do not accept it as â€œinspired word of godâ€, for many reasons.
> 
> Providing personal anecdotes does nothing to prove the existence of any supernatural being(s).
> 
> ...


Dude, you are totally blinded and I don't expect any other answer from you other than name calling and aggression. I am a chemist. I have 3 degrees. I have studied evolution and creation and the facts are more supportive for creation than evolution.

In the view of modern culture, how could anyone be so foolish as to doubt evolution? After all, its defenders point to all kinds of examples to back their beliefs. A thoughtful look, though, at two categories of examplesâ€"past and presentâ€"reveals how far the grand story of evolution strays from reality.
First, it helps to know what the word â€œevolutionâ€ means to the person using it. If it merely means that certain animal traits change between generations, thatâ€™s hard to refute. But most people use the term to recap a drawn-out cosmic story of how hydrogen formed stars, stars formed planets, living cells formed on planets, and single-celled life developed into every living thing on Earth. Now, thatâ€™s tough to defendâ€"but many still try.
Past Evolution?
Supposed examples of past evolution use circular logic. Adherents assume evolution before they conclude evolution. Take stars, for instance. How do astronomers assign â€œstar formation ratesâ€ to galaxies? They canâ€™t use observational science, since nobody has ever seen a star form. So, they argue like this: We see stars all across the sky. We see stars die in explosions. Billions-of-year-old galaxies should have run out of those stars that burn through their fuel in only millions of years before exploding. Therefore, some place out there must keep making stars.
Supposed examples of past evolution use circular logic. Adherents assume evolution before they conclude evolution. Tweet: Supposed examples of past evolution use circular logic. Adherents assume evolution before they conclude evolution. 
Space dust (gas) doesnâ€™t contract into starsâ€"it expands. Secular star formation rates hinge on the assumption of billions of years of stellar evolution, not observable science. Until experts give examples of new stars actually emerging, then our universe better fits â€œHe made the stars alsoâ€ from Genesis 1:16 than the circular logic about star formation.
Next, media, museums, and most biology textbooks use â€œape-menâ€ as examples of past evolution. But they fail to expose the fact that evolutionary experts disagree over whether each ape-man candidate belongs in human ancestry or in ape ancestry. Take the African fossil nicknamed Lucy, for example. Some experts say it became human, but others say it just became extinct. With its chimp-like size, skull, fingers, ribs, and legs, Lucy was clearly an ape. Similarly, many once taught that Java-Man, one of several fossils evolutionists call **** erectus, somehow became us. However, other evolutionists identify the **** erectus fossil collection as just an extinct variety of humans, like the Neanderthals.
How do evolutionists get their â€œape-menâ€ amid so much dispute? They either upgrade an ape or downgrade a human. But if Lucy was clearly an ape and Java Man a human, then whereâ€™s the evolution? Extinctions of created kinds or of their varieties show no evolutionâ€"they simply reflect the Genesis 3 curse of death.
Present Evolution?
What about the supposed modern examples of evolution in action? Each reduces to variation within a stable kind. Over 150 years ago, Charles Darwin described differences between pigeonsâ€™ feathers to illustrate evolution. What do we have today? Still just pigeons. The passenger pigeon variety has gone extinct since then. So, if anything pigeons have devolved, not evolved. Yes, certain creature features can change between generationsâ€"like stripes on a zebra or zorse. None of these variations support big-picture evolution. Meanwhile, basic creature body plans, like the horse kind, remain true to their original design.
These stable kinds confirm Genesis 1:24: â€œGod said, â€˜Let the earth bring forth every living creature according to its kind.â€™â€ God equipped each kind to express variations. Animals tweak their designed traits to fit into changing settings.1 Different-looking people display Godâ€™s love for creativity.2
Nobody has shown that particles-to-people evolution happened in the past or happens today. But for those willing to see it, evidence for Genesis creation abounds. Tweet: Nobody has shown that particles-to-people evolution happened in the past or happens today. But for those willing to see it, evidence for Genesis creation abounds. 
No new stars form from gas clouds, no new humans from apes, and no new animals from pigeons or horses. Nobody has shown that particles-to-people evolution happened in the past or happens today. But for those willing to see it, evidence for Genesis creation abounds.


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

CTone said:


> â€œunbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no godâ€
> the premise of the argument is both flawed and ridiculous. *The failure to disprove something does not constitute proof of its existence*.
> 
> *The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim,......[/*QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

I don't think I called anyone a name and I don't think I was aggressive in any manner. If you are a chemist with three degrees please IM with those details so I can verify your background.
you could also send me any books your have written or any peer reviews articles you have authored.


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

AS Process Technology - Lee College
AS Natural Science - Lee College
Also a minor in music from Lee College

BS Environmental Chemistry - University of Houston Clear Lake

MS Analytical Chemistry Illinois Institute of Technology (in progress)

Go to www.ICR.org and look at all the scientist who are believers in creationism.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

I didn't write this. But a world renounced chemist did. 

Professor James M. Tour is one of the ten most cited chemists in the world. He is famous for his work on nanocars (pictured above, courtesy of Wikipedia), nanoelectronics, graphene nanostructures, carbon nanovectors in medicine, and green carbon research for enhanced oil recovery and environmentally friendly oil and gas extraction. He is currently a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science at Rice University. He has authored or co-authored 489 scientific publications and his name is on 36 patents. Although he does not regard himself as an Intelligent Design theorist, Professor Tour, along with over 700 other scientists, took the courageous step back in 2001 of signing the Discovery Instituteâ€™s â€œA Scientific Dissent from Darwinismâ€, which read: â€œWe are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.â€

On Professor Tourâ€™s Website, thereâ€™s a very revealing article on evolution and creation, in which Tour bluntly states that he does not understand how macroevolution could have happened, from a chemical standpoint (all bold emphases below are mine â€“ VJT):

Although most scientists leave few stones unturned in their quest to discern mechanisms before wholeheartedly accepting them, when it comes to the often gross extrapolations between observations and conclusions on macroevolution, scientists, it seems to me, permit unhealthy leeway. When hearing such extrapolations in the academy, when will we cry out, â€œThe emperor has no clothes!â€?

â€¦I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution could have happened. Hence, am I not free to join the ranks of the skeptical and to sign such a statement without reprisals from those that disagree with me? â€¦ Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution? If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## bubbas kenner (Sep 4, 2010)

Duckchasr said:


> Well CTone show me unbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no God. You can't because none exist. While there is overwhelming evidence of an Intelligent Designer. You have to have faith to believe in evolution, you have to have faith to believe scientist are not motivated by some agenda in their "findings". I choose to have faith in God. Man hasn't convinced me otherwise and it is not possible because no matter how long they strive to take God out of the position of The Creator they can't because He is the Truth and every man is a liar. Put that in your heart and ponder on it. Take Care.


Well said Duckchasr


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.





CTone said:


> â€œunbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no godâ€
> the premise of the argument is both flawed and ridiculous. *The failure to disprove something does not constitute proof of its existence*.
> 
> The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim, especially in cases where the claims are unsupported or un-falsifiable. With no enduring evidence that a God exists, there is simply no reason to believe in a deity, even if it's not possible to irrefutably disprove his existence.
> ...



Look around you in nature it should be obvious. What or who do you say made man? Looking forward to your opinion. I have a book that tells you where man came from and all about man. Even chapters on how to live a peace filled life. You can read it too. It's been on the best seller list for a long time. Have a good evening.


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

George David Wald (November 18, 1906 â€“ April 12, 1997) was an American scientist who studied pigments in the retina. He won a share of the 1967 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Haldan Keffer Hartline and Ragnar Granit.

He said this.

"There are only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with the only possible conclusion that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God. I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible; spontaneous generation arising to evolution." (Wald, George, "Innovation and Biology," Scientific American, Vol. 199, Sept. 1958, p. 100)

So he is choosing not to believe in a creator yet he admits it's the only scientific possibility. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

Well Ctone where do you say man came from? Looking forward to you opinion so I can share with my Christian brethren what the flaws of your stance is. I can only plant the seed God gives the increase.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

I will try to explain it to you.
Evolutionary biologistists use Darwinian theory to explain that man (**** sapiens) evolved from other primates over thousands of years. The theories has been tested and retested over and over again to prove this theory. Darwinian theory has been proven successfully with many thousands of other species of animals as well as plants, bacterias, viralses and other organic items. There is also significant evidence that that over millions of years species have evolved into other species. The evolution of species is random, and the most successful changes, result in the survival of species that had the most success of procreation.

The theory of evolution only relates to changes within and of species, and has no relation to abiogenesis which is the study of how â€œlifeâ€ was created. The scientists that study and examine abiogenesis are still working on how â€œlifeâ€ was created.

It is theorized that the universe began some 13.6 billions years ago with a â€œbig bangâ€ explosion of matter. This theory has been further explained by observations of an expanding universe, confirmed by numerous scientist such as Hubble and others as well as scientific experiments by NASA, and many other cosmologists.

These are ideas that I do not â€œbelieveâ€ in, but rather have found evidence for and trust in the peer reviewed findings of celebrated scientists over the last 200 years. I am fully aware that some people see these findings as affront to their â€œbeliefsâ€ as they may contradict their beliefs in an intervening deity. I am also comfortable with knowing that there is no life after death.
All of these scientific studies and findings can be researched, confirmed, and learned by anyone willing to challenge their intellect. 
No one can â€œproveâ€ the nonexistence of a god, just like no one can prove the nonexistence of flying unicorns. There just happens no evidence of one. If there was evidence there would be no need for your â€œfaithâ€. People of faith tend to be atheist of all other gods but their own, interesting donâ€™t you think.


----------



## monark (May 12, 2005)

The man sitting here reading all this wants to jump in the argument to post facts to prove or disprove this or that. But the God that lives inside of me told me to say a prayer for CTone so tonight I offer up a prayer for you & everyone else on this post. Blessings.


----------



## tngbmt (May 30, 2004)

i think it's perfectly ok for someone to believe that there is no God.
further more, there is no such place in which we called heaven, pearly gates, eternal golf courses.
too many of us today see God as Morgan Freeman or George Burns.
i'd rather discuss religion with an open minded agnostic (assumption).

1. natural law is the standard that directly reflects human nature. whether you believe Him or not, seeing tragedies such as the school shooting brings sympathy and opposition to such act. the law is written in our very self and it is amplified by reasoning (or diminished by lack there of) allowing us to rationally co-exist (self preservation and the continuation of the species). unlike animals, man has the ability to vary his choices to not only choosing pleasure or avoiding pain. how did we acquired this so called 'natural law'? natural law exists in the heart and mind of every human being. it is the single self embracing obligation that was imposed on all human. how can one be ignorant of the law? we can't. however a person can be influenced to pervert the law or ignore the law. the shooter did not accept/obey the natural law. all evil acts are similar. 

does such law exist?


----------



## bzrk180 (Jan 7, 2008)

CTone said:


> . People of faith tend to be atheist of all other gods but their own, interesting donâ€™t you think.


Simplistic.... I find it interesting that people will search to the ends of the world to find evidence to support their thoughts on millions of other topics, but when it comes to their faith, will only turn to one book that talks about THEIR faith.

The God I understand is FAR too big to be put into one faith, or one image, or one understanding of "God"....

And in regards to faith over science...

Lets say that something happened that destroyed all of the books we have on God and Christianity and we had to start from scratch.

Now some things will be absolute right??

Gravity, 2 apples plus 2 apples will be 4 apples, the rings in the trees will be found to give accurate ages of the trees....things like that...

But how different would God look without the stories that have been written down?


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

I guess I believe that we have been taught a lie and it's not about God. It's scientist that are atheist and without God's Creation they had to come up with a narrative that explained where we came from without God. You claim that it's proven by scientist but it is not. In fact nothing that Darwin claimed have come to pass muster and almost everything he claimed has been debunked by real science. Other than perhaps some adaptions in species to encourage the survival of the fittest. The Cambrian Explosion includes individual species including some that are still with us today with absolutely NO TRANSITION. I included an article that talks a little about that at the bottom.

QUOTE from CTone 
""It is theorized that the universe began some 13.6 billions years ago with a â€œbig bangâ€ explosion of matter. This theory has been further explained by observations of an expanding universe, confirmed by numerous scientist such as Hubble and others as well as scientific experiments by NASA, and many other cosmologists.

These are ideas that I do not â€œbelieveâ€ in, but rather have found evidence for and trust in the peer reviewed findings of celebrated scientists over the last 200 years. 
All of these scientific studies and findings can be researched, confirmed, and learned by anyone willing to challenge their intellect. 
People of faith tend to be atheist of all other gods but their own, interesting donâ€™t you think."

Once again I say it takes great faith to believe that scientist can figure out what happened 13.6 Billion years ago let alone be unbiased in their "Beliefs". As Christians we are told our God is a Jealous God.

Article from http://deeptruths.com/articles/big_lie_exposed.html
*The fossil record*

If this big, ridiculous, idiotic lie, this complicated, fabricated framework of fiction called evolution were true, then there should be more missing links dug up than anything else! If there were billions of years of evolution, we'd be up to our ears in missing links!
Even Darwin realised this, and so said, "As by this theory innumerable transitional forms ("links") must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? ... The number of intermediate and transitional links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great. He then answered his own question about these missing links by declaring: "I believe the answer lies in the (geological) record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed."
But now, 120 years later, Darwin's excuse is totally ridiculous! Literally hundreds of millions of fossils have been extracted from all fossil-bearing rock strata and none of them are "transitional forms" or missing links--they all obviously belong to a definite species! In fact, it is estimated that over 100,000 different, distinct species of fossils have been found! Yes, no "links"!
A.S. Romer, professor of zoology at Harvard University, recently summed up the present situation when he said: "'Links' are missing just where we most fervently desire them, and it is all too probable that many 'links' will continue to be missing."

Well if your still reading it's all good man we got folks on here praying for you. That's a Great thing. Take Care and do some research on your claims. Don't just take "Science" at it's word. God is real to me because he brought me Love when there was none.​


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

Back on topic. His Word was not welcome in our Schools even though there is no wisdom above it. Now they wonder what happened.

Exodus 20:3-17

3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ***, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

And Jesus tells us how to live.

* John 13:34 *

34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

And they tell us this wisdom has no place in our schools that it's a fairy tale that it's racist that it's homophobic. Really? Did they even read it?

I felt like I needed to share these verses from Isaiah 43

7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.
8 Bring forth the blind people that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears.
9 Let all the nations be gathered together, and let the people be assembled: who among them can declare this, and shew us former things? let them bring forth their witnesses, that they may be justified: or let them hear, and say, It is truth.
10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

Public schools exist to educate, not to proselytize. Children in public schools are a captive audience. Making prayer an official part of the school day is coercive and invasive. What 5, 8, or 10-year-old could view prayers recited as part of class routine as "voluntary"? Religion is private, and schools are public, so it is appropriate that the two should not mix. To introduce religion in our public schools builds walls between children who may not have been aware of religious differences before.

Our public schools are for *all* children, whether Catholic, Baptist, Quaker, atheist, Buddhist, Jewish, agnostic. The schools are supported by *all* taxpayers, and therefore should be free of religious observances and coercion. It is the sacred duty of parents and churches to instil religious beliefs, free from government dictation. Institutionalizing prayers in public schools usurps the rights of parents.

Individual, silent, personal prayer never has and never could be outlawed in public schools. The courts have declared _government-fostered_ prayers unconstitutional - those led, required, sanctioned, scheduled or suggested by officials, teachers, coaches, etc.

In Texas public schools each school day is started with the pledge of allegiance. In 1954 the line was added â€œone nation under godâ€, so god is represented in todayâ€™s public schools. It does sound a little pagan to me that a Christian would say pledge to a flag that represents a secular government. I think that some Christian denominations opt out of this daily ritual.

Didn't Jesus call people hypocrites for praying on public street corners, telling his followers to "go into a closet to pray to their father in secret". let's have some more of that.


----------



## tngbmt (May 30, 2004)

yeah i dont agree with school mandatory prayer either. that should have been done at home by parents.

prayers are generally misunderstood any way. most people pray to ask for favors. the only time some people remember to pray is some form of 'i want'. no prayer before a football game but if a kid close to you gets carried off the field .. guess who want prayers. post a sign in front of an operating room .. no prayer needed, mom doesn't need God's help. 

you misunderstood what Jesus taught .. He caution us not to pray in public with the intent to earn man's respect (ie. most politicians do this to appease the religious voter, acting holy for show). 'close the door and pray' means focus on God when praying. it all comes back to the heart's intent.


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

As a Christian, I have a question. If we had "God in schools" at some utopian time in the past and we still ended up in our current situation, what would be different now?


----------



## DA REEL DADDY (Jun 7, 2005)

Stuart said:


> As a Christian, I have a question. If we had "God in schools" at some utopian time in the past and we still ended up in our current situation, what would be different now?


Who knows now. When I say putting God back in our schools. I mean give our students a moment of silence to reflect on what standards God, however they view Him, is asking them to perform positively and loving to all. Maybe giving them a little hope to face the challenges that are young ones are faced with today.

I'm just asking, we allow and encourage our students, our children, to exercise a few minutes a day in their own private meditation and or prayer to take time to reflect on themselves and what can be done today to make themselves and their fellow students more tolerant, caring, and respectful towards each other. Maybe create a pause so there's no hatred, violence, or aggravation towards each other.

What is wrong with that? Will all participate in a positive and hopeful meditation or prayer? I doubt it. But who knows? it may create enough pause and reflection where a spark may become contagious and we can, in some way, start to put an end to this violence.

I am in no way suggesting that each religion force or influence another's belief of how to worship God on other. I will say this, I do believe almost all religions teach peace, love, and helping, that's what's important in a moment of reflection everyday.


----------



## atcfisherman (Oct 5, 2006)

We need to allow for God to be back in our homes. No, He didn't leave. But if Christians started living like we truly have a relationship with God, we would influence our children and spouses first and then it will flow out from there in love.


----------



## KeeperTX (Jul 8, 2013)

All these things must come to pass. Do we think that God is not able to put a stop to all this madness? He sure could if he wanted to. There will be a great falling away. There will also be a great deception. If somebody keeps rejecting Jesus Christ, wipe your feet and keep going. Share the gospel when the opportunity arises. 

Keep planting seeds. Then one day according to the Holy Spirit's timing, that seed will sprout and produce a great harvest. Time is too short. We need to get out there and do God's will. Blessings to all.


----------



## DA REEL DADDY (Jun 7, 2005)

KeeperTX said:


> All these things must come to pass. Do we think that God is not able to put a stop to all this madness? He sure could if he wanted to. There will be a great falling away. There will also be a great deception. If somebody keeps rejecting Jesus Christ, wipe your feet and keep going. Share the gospel when the opportunity arises.
> 
> _*Keep planting seeds. Then one day according to the Holy Spirit's timing, that seed will sprout and produce a great harvest. *_Time is too short. We need to get out there and do God's will. Blessings to all.


I will agree with that. That is what I was suggesting a few short minutes every morning maybe the tree will grow. Just let the Holy Spirit enter a heart when it opens.


----------



## monark (May 12, 2005)

CTone said:


> If your god is â€œall powerfulâ€, how could you keep him out? Oh thatâ€™s right, the is no god. This god only exists in your imagination.





CTone said:


> Using statements similar to â€œit takes more faith to believe in evolution and scienceâ€ shows a lack of understanding for science.
> scientific practicesâ€"observation and experiment; the development of falsifiable hypotheses; the relentless questioning of established views





CTone said:


> â€œunbiased scientific evidence that proves there is no godâ€
> the premise of the argument is both flawed and ridiculous. *The failure to disprove something does not constitute proof of its existence*.





CTone said:


> Public schools exist to educate, not to proselytize. Children in public schools are a captive audience.
> Didn't Jesus call people hypocrites for praying on public street corners, telling his followers to "go into a closet to pray to their father in secret". let's have some more of that.


CTone, you are the most Christian like Atheist I have ever heard of based on your last post. I'll pray tonight that your computer quits randomly changing Fonts on you. Blessings.


----------



## bubbas kenner (Sep 4, 2010)

Stuart said:


> As a Christian, I have a question. If we had "God in schools" at some utopian time in the past and we still ended up in our current situation, what would be different now?


Only God knows.But what would it hurt to have prayer in school as it was not so long ago.Before all this nonsense.I will not say all of our children need to believe in a certain way but at least give our children a chance to make up their confused minds.


----------



## tngbmt (May 30, 2004)

God is love. 
teach loving one another .. that should be sufficient. they will find God only thru grace.

we long to teach math and science, build football stadiums, but we fail to realize that school is where the children should be learning to socialize, exist with each other. even in the churches, we sometimes forget the love part.


----------



## Duckchasr (Apr 27, 2011)

From Wikipedia...

Until the late 19th century, creation was taught in nearly all schools in the United States, often from the position that the literal interpretation of the Bible is inerrant. With the widespread acceptance of the scientific theory of evolution in the 1860s after being first introduced in 1859, and developments in other fields such as geology and astronomy, public schools began to teach science that was reconciled with Christianity by most people, but considered by a number of early fundamentalists to be directly at odds with the Bible.

from http://www.pbs.org

*Still Fighting for Evolution in Schools*

*By Stephanie Keep on Tue, 01 Dec 2015*

When I tell people that I work for the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Iâ€™m often asked, â€œWhat does NCSE do?â€ The short answer is that we work to keep creationism, â€œintelligent designâ€ (ID), and other kinds of non-science educationâ€"such as climate change denialâ€"out of public schools.

My take on it from the Bible

Romans chapter 1:19-22 ,25 & 28-32

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,.....

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie...

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

But like KeeperTexas says it's just fulfilling Prophecy of the end times.


----------

