Valedictorian sues over Gospel speech

[Alcott]

Every single one of you that agree with her on this would have the opposite opinion if she was a Muslim trying to convert people to Islam.

No; a muslim can make such a graduation speech. I would just stand up and shout [crude language snipped] or something similar.

 

[KenH]

Real Christian of ya, Alcott. Real Christian of ya. :tear:

 

[Alcott]

Glad you agree.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

People of other religions consider Christianity false. Thus the need for neutrality vis-a-vis religion in public schools. Either all have it, or none do.

No such monster as neutrality. You are either for God or against him.

 

[KenH]

Wanting the government to keep religious proselytizing out of its venues does not mean that one is against God.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Wanting the government to keep religious proselytizing out of its venues does not mean that one is against God.

Great keep out all the religous proselytizing youe want. But we have no business denying this young lady her free sppech rights because she shared the truth of the gospel which is far different. that religous proselytizing.

 

[KenH]

I don't think that government on any level should even be involved in education. I would like to see all education privately funded.

So I'll bow out of this argument and leave it up to those who want the government involved in education to hash it out.

 

[Don]

Great keep out all the religous proselytizing youe want. But we have no business denying this young lady her free sppech rights because she shared the truth of the gospel which is far different. that religous proselytizing.

Don't know about Ken; but for me, it was never about her free speech rights. She will win the lawsuit; the school admitted they restricted her freedom of speech.

For me, it's always been: Did she purposely deceive, in order to share the truth of the gospel? And therein lies the conundrum: If deception is involved, how are people to know that it's truth?

You and I both know it's the truth; but do the unsaved? Or do they see only the deception, and miss the message?

"Those Christians think they can lie, and deceive us, because they have the truth."

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Don't know about Ken; but for me, it was never about her free speech rights. She will win the lawsuit; the school admitted they restricted her freedom of speech.

For me, it's always been: Did she purposely deceive, in order to share the truth of the gospel? And therein lies the conundrum: If deception is involved, how are people to know that it's truth?

You and I both know it's the truth; but do the unsaved? Or do they see only the deception, and miss the message?

"Those Christians think they can lie, and deceive us, because they have the truth."

Again based on this ideology we should call our missionaries home. They go into countries where it is illegal to share the gospel and do so under the cover of something else.

 

[Don]

Again based on this ideology we should call our missionaries home. They go into countries where it is illegal to share the gospel and do so under the cover of something else.

Most of the ones I know, go under a work visa; and they do the work, and they do the missionary work additionally. In my opinion, this isn't deception.

If they're entering the country under a work visa, and don't do the work, only doing the missionary work....If they're specifically told they cannot come into the country and evangelize, and they say, "no, we won't do that," and then go do it....

Then yes, I think we should call those missionaries home. They lied. They deceived. They're wonderful examples of Christ, eh?

If you can show me one scriptural example of Jesus or the disciples saying, "no, we won't do that, and we'll abide by your rules," and then doing it anyway, I'll happily rescind my point of view.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Most of the ones I know, go under a work visa; and they do the work, and they do the missionary work additionally. In my opinion, this isn't deception.

If they're entering the country under a work visa, and don't do the work, only doing the missionary work....If they're specifically told they cannot come into the country and evangelize, and they say, "no, we won't do that," and then go do it....

Then yes, I think we should call those missionaries home. They lied. They deceived. They're wonderful examples of Christ, eh?

If you can show me one scriptural example of Jesus or the disciples saying, "no, we won't do that, and we'll abide by your rules," and then doing it anyway, I'll happily rescind my point of view.

Acts 5:26-42 26 Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned. 27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them, 28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

 

[Don]

Acts 5:26-42 26 Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned. 27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them, 28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

My challenge to you was to show scripture that showed the apostles saying, "we'll abide by your rules," in a deceptive ploy to be able to preach the gospel.

Perhaps I need to clarify? If you can show scripture that shows Jesus and/or His disciples saying to the Pharisees or others, "no, we won't preach, because you told us not to, and we'll abide by your rules"; and then going and preaching anyway, I'll happily rescind my point of view and jump on the "let's lie for God!" bandwagon.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

My challenge to you was to show scripture that showed the apostles saying, "we'll abide by your rules," in a deceptive ploy to be able to preach the gospel.

Perhaps I need to clarify? If you can show scripture that shows Jesus and/or His disciples saying to the Pharisees or others, "no, we won't preach, because you told us not to, and we'll abide by your rules"; and then going and preaching anyway, I'll happily rescind my point of view and jump on the "let's lie for God!" bandwagon.

Then I suppose you could show me where this girl did the same.

 

[Don]

Okay, I'm going to re-say what I've said at least once, perhaps twice before: We don't know what her intention was. We don't know if she intended to deceive; we don't know if it was spur-of-the-moment with no intent to deceive.

I'm holding my applause until we find out for sure whether she was "lying for Christ" or not.

If she had told the school authorities that she was going to do it, and they told her not to, and she did it anyway -- I'd be giving her a standing ovation and initiating "the wave" in the stands, because she aptly embodied the example of the scripture you provided.

But if she, and you, somehow think that intentional deception, intentional lying, in some way honors God, well, I disagree.

If you can prove that she had no intention for deception, I'll join in the praise. Until then, I'll keep praying that no one was turned away from Christ because she gave an appearance of deception (remember that "abstain from all appearances of evil" verse?).

This thread has gone on long enough. I've said my piece (at least twice), so I'll take my leave.

 

[windcatcher]

I don't see where obediance to preaching the Gospel of Christ is taught by scripture to be subject to restriction. In fact, I believer we are taught to preach it both in season and out of season.

If she were being paid for her speach, then perhaps the state or school might have a say. As it was, her position as valedictorian is a position of academic honor which normally places a highly acheiving student in a position to pass onto others a bit of themselves and the values which helped them in their success and acheivement. As such speach, except for profane, should be allowed. The question as to whether it agrees with the 'universially' of the audience is not the question. The speach is not a product of the educators, or the board of education, or the government. If it were a muslim or a bhuddis, I would still have the same opinion as far as their rights.

Taking it at face value, to judge this young lady's speach as being a purposeful deception, with a firm basis in a previous agreement ...... is beyond the content of what we know or what has been revealed: As she is a Christian, or reports to be....and I see no just way to doubt her profession based upon what little I know of the real facts..... the law of love and especially love for one another teaches me to accept what I do know, and believe in the best in those areas which I have no knowledge of ....and for me to refuse to entertain those condemning thoughts which are evil imaginings.

 

[tenor]

I have a couple of statements and a cople of questions:

Question: Why is an apology considered weakness? I amy have a TRUE statement about my wife's dress, yet it unintentionally hurts her feelings.

Statement: A person who willingly bucks an official rule (law, policy, etc.) should be willing to accept the consequences of the action until it is changed.

Question: Many Christians are suing for their "rights," according to scripture do we really have any in this realm? Also, is it worth winning a battle and ultimately losing the war? EX: A Christian sues to keep his Bible on his desk at the front of the business - He the ase, but has lost the realationship with his boss, an unbeliever.

Also KenH, I agree with the change you made. I've done the same. It in no way diminishes the prayer.

Thnaks,
Tim

 

[grahame]

Good for her in standing for the truth. :applause: