Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Do Our Beliefs Need to Be on Public Display?

In response to the two rulings on Monday by the U.S. Supreme Court on the public display of the Ten Commandments, Cal Thomas, in his column today, poses a thought-provoking question for conservative Christians: . . .

While critics of these mostly anti-religious rulings are right in scolding the court for its misinterpretation of the Constitution, are such persons also in violation of the will of the very God they claim to represent? Why, in fact, do such people feel the need for public displays representing what they believe? Isn't this a kind of false security, similar to airport security screeners?

Religious activists fool themselves if they believe public displays of the Ten Commandments reflect a more moral and less corrupt nation. One needs only to watch television to discern the level of our depravity.

God dismissed the visible sacrifices of the ancient Israelites when those sacrifices became rituals. In their hearts and behavior, they worshipped false gods. Their actions did not match their doctrines. Do those advocating for more public displays of religion privately practice what they publicly preach? If they did, the influence of their proclaimed righteousness might reach all the way to the Supreme Court. Whether it did, or not, it would reach all the way to their God.

Should we as Christians be all that concerned about whether our beliefs are visibly represented in the public square? Does God really need the State to promote Him?


At Wednesday, June 29, 2005 9:42:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


I would say, no, that Christians do not NEED to have public displays of their beliefs. That having been said, it doesn't hurt, either.

What bothers me is not specifically the removal of the Ten Commandments but the removal of yet another 'brick' from our foundation. Many bricks have already been removed and this is just another.

Next, it will be removal of all mentions of God from our monuments soon followed by our currency. The goal of these extremist is the removal of all mention.

But the key word here is REMOVAL. I suppose the atheists believe that all of this stuff mysteriously appeared one strange night in the mid-1980's or something. No way could this have been done by our deist forefathers!

To quote Pink Floyd, "it's all just another brick in the wall."

the Heckler

At Thursday, June 30, 2005 12:23:00 PM, Blogger Roch101 said...

"I suppose the atheists believe that all of this stuff mysteriously appeared one strange night in the mid-1980's or something. No way could this have been done by our deist forefathers!"

I can't speak for atheists, but factually no, the mention of God on money was not instigated by the founding fathers nor was the mention of God in the Pledge of Allegiance. You guys need to start checking your facts around here.

At Thursday, June 30, 2005 4:57:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Indeed, Roch.

I do know the history of both of these and others. I can see where my post makes it sound like the way you are taking it.

I should more distinctly state that it was our forefathers who laid the foundation through their words, writings,laws and actions that permitted and gave justification for adding God to the currency as well as most every substantial monument in D.C.

In order for something to be removed- it has to be there. Where did it come from? Whether it was 50 years ago or 200 years ago- it was perfectly acceptable then. Why? Because that's the way it was!
Only in the last few years has it been challenged and to hear the screaming about it you'd think that we were starting from scratch to determine IF God should be mentioned.

btw, I never said anything about the Pledge.

the Heckler


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home