Three Ugly Truths Exposed by the Tebow Assault

American Thinker ^ | December 27, 2011 | Timothy Gordon

[rhema]

The ongoing imbroglio with Denver Bronco quarterback Tim Tebow has made plain three really unflattering facts about the secular-progressive ("sec-prog") movement in this country. Tebow's straightforward and unapologetic Christianity has been received by NFL mensae magnae (contradiction in terms?) as a type of threat. These folks have responded by building upon the previously gathered strength of the anti-Christian movement in this nation. Such a movement, by the way, is far more prevalent than it formerly appeared.

First truth: the sec-progs have meatier game in sight than we used to think. That is, when sec-progs start out declaring that they aim merely to set a plain whereupon all religions can fairly "coexist," they really contemplate an end-game where religions fade permanently out of view. Have a look at the emergent history of the jurisprudence: "No federal religion" became "no state religions"; this became "no government entanglement with religion"; this became "no governmental support for religion"; this became "no governmental mention of religion"; this led to the phase that the Tebow debacle currently evinces: "no popular mention of religion in any public sphere, including private affairs which get viewed on TV." One can easily imagine the last few steps in this phenomenology of disappearance.

Coming back to Tebow, let's remember that his comparatively subtle iconographic decorum has managed to stir up the hornets' nest to a startling degree: recent betrayals by active (Lions players Stephen Tulloch and Tony Scheffler) and especially retired (Merrill Hodge and Jake Plummer) players lack all response-to-stimulus proportionality and sound more like personal defensive responses to some governmental actor threatening the players' own religious liberty. That is, all such ugliness over Tebow taking to his own knee in thanks, or occasionally mentioning the J-word after a game, exposes a fetid, rotten sort of secularism at the heart of

[hosepipe]

[ Stick to your day job. You suck as a preacher or analyst of religions. ]

I feel the hate.. Hate is accepted gratefully but graded..

[central_va]

You are FOS.

[rdb3]

Example: Jesus name is not Jesus, nor is Jehovah's name Jehova.. Neither Hebrew/Aramaic or Greek has the letter “J”..

No, His name is Yeshua. The English translation from the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name "Yeshua" gets us to "Jesus".

Studying these things to me is more fun than stuff like string theory/quantum mechanics, which I enjoy.

25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
Today we have Obama, no cash, and no hope!

If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.

Or you can get raw with these strings.

How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).

Either way, the violin is sweet yet LETHAL.

Do it!

[donmeaker]

I see Christianity as a modern heir to the ancient nature religions, seeking to use similar means to answer the same old questions: Why are we here? What is good? What are we do do?

The Pope’s of the Roman Catholic Church has an elected head who’s title in Latin is Pontifex Maximus, the same title given to the head priest in ancient Rome. The ancient religions were always transmuting, and modern religions continue to do so. Latin Jupiter was a transmutation of Greek Zeus-Pater, or English [sky]G-d the Father.

Humanity seems to demand religion, and some prefer to justify their belief by ancient texts that are unquestionable to believers. The texts can be the Torah, the Bhagavad-gita, the writings of Virgil, or the New Testament, the Koran, or the Book of Mormon. Each claims to be the best, and last, and rejects the others as either heresy if newer, or ‘incomplete’ if old.

Christianity had synods which defined what Christianity was, but demands of people change, problems and situations change, so that generates a need for another synod, later reformations, or in the case of Methodists, annual meetings. Rather like the Romans had colleges of priests, to decide what practices were permitted, or proscribed. One year Isis was permitted, the next year banned, in response to corruption of the priesthood. Alas, the Roman college of priests didn’t prophesy the corruption, but rather reacted to it after it became well known. In like manner, Joseph Smith Jr. was unable to prophesy that he would be accidentally shot by his brother Hiram while attempting to escape from jail while the jail was being attacked by a mob.

In like manner, the Catholic Church responded (slowly) to priests molesting children, but have (it seems to me) proven themselves unable to prophesy and act based on that prophesy.

Yogi Berra said something to the effect that predicting is hard, especially about the future.

Called out? How so? I see myself, and Christians in a long history of asking: Why are we here? What is good? What should we do?

Who here is different? I may have read a bit more than most, but am no more clever than most. I am humble, and continue to search for the same answers.

Decartes is known for writing “I think, therefore I am.” but before that he wrote “I doubt, therefore I think.”

Mother Theresa had her own doubts. I certainly am not superior to her.

[donmeaker]

The Anarchists have long proclaimed that property was theft. The OWS jerks assert that any failure of the government to take over all property is a subsidy by corrupt government under the control of various property owners (who would not like their property taken by the government).

I propose that ‘theft’ has a meaning. It has a definition in law. If behavior is not in accordance with that definition, it is not theft.

Even if you don’t like that behavior.

[donmeaker]

Harry Truman was once told that some evil defense contractor charged too much money for a part. Harry Truman said “Find me the guy who wrote the check.”

I would humbly suggest the place to stop spending is with the people who write the checks, not with the people who cash the checks.

[9YearLurker]

Exactly.

[Fledermaus]

Just more of the same crap coming from morons that hate religion. They can’t read the Constitution so they try to redefine it’s meaning. Too bad so many brain dead idiots (we all know them) are with us.

They love the “separation of church and state” nonsense that IS NOT in the Constitution. They always quote the first amendment putting a period after “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion” when there is comma followed by “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” which is then followed by a semi-colon adding freedom of speech, press, assembly, etc.

I notice how the left remembers the semi-colon and whines about their freedom of the press but ignore the free exercise of religion.

I’m no lawyer but how is a bunch of high school or college kids praying or having a moment of silence after a game Congress passing a law respecting an establishment of religion? Looks to me like folks expressing their free exercise thereof.

I think to me it hit a head of how far down this bunny hole we’ve gone when Christie O’Donnell, when running for the Senate, brought this point up at a law school and they laughed.

Personally, if lawyers think that’s wrong they should not be allowed to practice law.

[RightOnline]

Hate? No....far from it. Nothing of the sort. It’s just that scholarship isn’t exactly your long suit when it comes to the study of Christianity, but that’s fine. See, I know absolutely nothing about horses, for example, so I avoid posting here on FR about the finer points of horse breeding.

Like that.

[Daveinyork]

And if the theft is unconstitutional?

[Daveinyork]

Theft has meaning. It means taking someone’s rightful property against his will by force or deception. Taking money from taxpayers and giving it to team owners qualifies. If the government has that much excess cash uit should give it back in the form of tax cuts or rebates - to the people who have paid it.

Taxation for the legitimate purposes of government is legitimate, but taking from some people and giving to others, whether by taxation or eminent domain, is theft, actually robbery, because it’s taken by force, or threat thereof.

[cowboyway]

I see Christianity as a modern heir to the ancient nature religions, seeking to use similar means to answer the same old questions: Why are we here? What is good? What are we do do? The Pope’s of the Roman Catholic Church has an elected head who’s title in Latin is Pontifex Maximus, the same title given to the head priest in ancient Rome. The ancient religions were always transmuting, and modern religions continue to do so. Latin Jupiter was a transmutation of Greek Zeus-Pater, or English [sky]G-d the Father. Humanity seems to demand religion, and some prefer to justify their belief by ancient texts that are unquestionable to believers. The texts can be the Torah, the Bhagavad-gita, the writings of Virgil, or the New Testament, the Koran, or the Book of Mormon. Each claims to be the best, and last, and rejects the others as either heresy if newer, or ‘incomplete’ if old. Christianity had synods which defined what Christianity was, but demands of people change, problems and situations change, so that generates a need for another synod, later reformations, or in the case of Methodists, annual meetings. Rather like the Romans had colleges of priests, to decide what practices were permitted, or proscribed. One year Isis was permitted, the next year banned, in response to corruption of the priesthood. Alas, the Roman college of priests didn’t prophesy the corruption, but rather reacted to it after it became well known. In like manner, Joseph Smith Jr. was unable to prophesy that he would be accidentally shot by his brother Hiram while attempting to escape from jail while the jail was being attacked by a mob. In like manner, the Catholic Church responded (slowly) to priests molesting children, but have (it seems to me) proven themselves unable to prophesy and act based on that prophesy. Yogi Berra said something to the effect that predicting is hard, especially about the future. Called out? How so? I see myself, and Christians in a long history of asking: Why are we here? What is good? What should we do? Who here is different? I may have read a bit more than most, but am no more clever than most. I am humble, and continue to search for the same answers. Decartes is known for writing “I think, therefore I am.” but before that he wrote “I doubt, therefore I think.” Mother Theresa had her own doubts. I certainly am not superior to her.

Dose all the above mean that you stand by your statement that Christianity is a pagan religion? Just answer the question.

I see myself, and Christians in a long history of asking: Why are we here? What is good? What should we do?

Christians know those answers:

Why are we here? To serve the Lord.

What is good? The Word of God.

What should we do? Follow the Word of God.

[donmeaker]

Yes, I continue to hold that Christianity is a pagan religion, by at least one definitions of pagan.

You agree, or seem to, that Christianity answers, for you, the important questions that I said were posed.

You agreed that at least one of the questions were answered by your received text, “The Word of the Lord”.

You see, we have so much in common.

[donmeaker]

To agree with your definition of ‘taking government money and giving it to team owners” as theft requires assuming that the government purpose is illegitimate. If a government body with power to tax does so, it may be bad policy, but that tax is not on its face, unconstitutional. In like manner, government policies that spend money on stadiums may also be bad policy, but may not be constitutional, unless there is a provision in the state constitution that bans government spending.

Federal government is one of limited powers. State government is one of plenary powers. That means that use of either of those policies is a good idea. There are many bad ideas that are completely constitutional.

That doesn’t mean that the constitutions are flawed though they may be. It means that government is not something that the people allow to run without supervision.

Subsidy of a business by a government may be bad policy without being theft.

[donmeaker]

Let me clean that up. I apologize for my sloppiness.

To agree with your definition of "taking government money and giving it to team owners” as theft requires assuming that the government purpose is illegitimate. If a government body with power to tax does so, it may be bad policy, but that tax is not on its face, unconstitutional. In like manner, government policies that spend money on stadiums may also be bad policy, but may not be unconstitutional, unless there is a provision in the state constitution that bans that form of government spending.

Federal government is one of limited powers. State government is one of plenary powers. That doesn't means that any particular use of either of those policies powers is a good idea. There are many bad ideas that are completely constitutional.

That doesn’t mean that the constitutions are flawed though they may be. It means that government is not something that the people should allow to run without supervision.

Subsidy of a business by a government may be bad policy without being theft.

I wanted to speak against the hyperbole that any policy that is disliked must be unconstitutional.

[Daveinyork]

It’s not supposed to work that way. Whatever authority is not specifically given to the government is prohibited to the government. At any rate, the Pensylvania constitution has a clause similar to the fifth amendment, and it hasn’t stopped the politicians from subsidizing sports arenas and using eminent domain to get the land for the arenas.

Do you favor such a use of government power?

[Colonel_Flagg]

For years, players on opposing teams have gathered at the center of the field at most every level for prayer and thanksgiving after games. Football is a violent sport and to emerge from some games unscathed is worthy of thanksgiving.

However, a high-profile player like Tebow takes thanksgiving to a level that makes humanists and liberals foam at the mouth.

Good for you, Mr. Tebow. May Almighty God protect your testimony and witness.

[Steve_Seattle]

There’s a lot of dueling evangelism on this site between Catholics and Protestants - all the daily devotionals competing with the papal pronouncements and so forth. How all that fits into “breaking news” or “current events” escapes me, but the mods allow it so I guess they consider it within the scope of the site. I personally think that those sorts of theological screeds should be on a “religion” thread unless they actually constitute major news, e.g., the pope endorses Obama or some such thing.

[hosepipe]

[ It’s just that scholarship isn’t exactly your long suit when it comes to the study of Christianity ]

Same accusation was made of Jesus about Judaism..
but he dealt with his “accuser” well..

Judaism during Jesus time (and before) was dysfunctional and corrupt(Talmud).. and fleshly.. still is..
Pretty much as what Christianity has become..

Litergy of all types and ceremony is Kabuki Theater..
Posturing, masks, makeup, costumes, and strange sounds..
the Holy Spirit has become a “Doofus” there..

It Mocks what it once was.. and is no more.. (mostly but not completely)..

[cowboyway]

Yes, I continue to hold that Christianity is a pagan religion, by at least one definitions of pagan.

Feel free to be specific for those of us that aren't as clever as you.

You see, we have so much in common.

Hardly. You stated that you and Christians were seeking the answers to three questions: Why are we here? What is good? What should we do?

I replied that Christians already know the answers which leaves you still seeking the answers through perversion and paganism.

I think the only similarity between you and I is that we're both carbon based life forms.

BTW, so is Pi......