Baylor Chapel and False Teaching

9,860 Views | 280 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by TexasScientist
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
3rd String Kicker said:

Below is a post from a Baylor employee who is also the wife of a longtime local southern Baptist pastor. I trust what she says about her friend. Some of you need to stop the rush to judgement that is all-too-regular in our society.


A friend of mine, Kaitlin Curtice, spoke this week at Baylor's chapel service. I have been so excited about her coming to this campus, I looked forward to seeing her face so I could just talk to another Native Christian who understands what I go through we aren't rare, I just don't have any here in Waco. My time with her was treasured and I look forward to seeing her again.

I watched her live and she did such a great job speaking. I am grateful to the chapel staff at Baylor for giving a platform to a female Native Christian. I don't think you know how uncommon that is. She shared excerpts from her book that is coming out in May (her story) and she prayed poetic prayers from her first book, Glory Happening. She spoke on some of the same Native concerns you will find on my feed or I vocalize if asked. As I have experienced in my DM's and conversations, Nativeness being talked about is not always appreciated. In fact many times my words are dismissed or defenses are raised so quickly it reveals they weren't listening to me, just hearing me. The terms and words Native Americans use are not always preferred by the majority. I/we know this, yet I/we still keep sharing.

Kaitlin's personal story and prayers were promoted to social media and the local media as "weird, to me" "non-Christian" and "pagan."

The space many Native Christians navigate is often misunderstood and too often brings out the worst of fragility or racism, by other Christians. I have experienced it and I am watching it happen this week to Kaitlin, on a large scale. I saw the ignorance of a student go so far as to lie about a prayer from a Christian and called a sister in Christ a pagan. I watched a news outlet take this student and his political group's word as fact and air a story about how a prayer to "Mother Mystery" was prayed at Baylor. I watched a local pastor, previous regent, back that story up with he "knows Baylor will do the right thing" (????). Clearly these people didn't bother to watch/rewatch the service, nor did the media.

I am emotionally watching online as a sister in Christ and Native American is called the worst of things, and the atrocities our people have experienced have become memes and hate filled messages toward her. So hateful her husband is having to filter her social media platforms. TOWARD A SISTER IN CHRIST. Christians.we are called to be better than this.

The student that has made this outcry misheard the very first line and while he focused on 'this must be pagan,' he missed a beautiful prayer to God. The opening line in the "controversial" prayer that Kaitlin read is "Oh God of Mystery".in chapel she said "Oh Mystery" -- not Mother Mystery. << she may have assumed in a Christian chapel service she could say Oh Mystery (God would be assumed). She may have assumed since she it had been already stated she was a Christian that it would be assumed she's speaking to God, not to a god. The words below that have been described as pagan by so many online, have become a re-focus for me to this week.

Oh God of mystery,
If we have tried to place you in a box,
break it.
No mold can hold you.
We search the surface of the earth
to understand you,
because we are your imprint.
But we cannot understand.
Only the kind glimpses
you give us can suffice.
And indeed they are everything we need.
Teach us to look out to your bigness.
to fall freely into your Holy Abyss,
into your depths,
where we see more glimpses of Kingdom things.
It's safe and good there,
and it is where we long to be.
Bring us to you,
the One who is
not here or there,
not this or that.
We do not even understand
how we long for you,
how we burn in our bones
for your presence.
It is simply our need.
Pull us closer still.
Amen.


As almost always, I usually wait back to say anything because the full truth isn't usually out right away. If this is indeed her prayer, I don't see anything wrong with it, I've been in several different denominations, and this isn't much different from some of the more creative prayers I've heard.

I hope she believes in the Christ, someone on here, a more reasonable poster, said they thought she may not believe in His deity. Hopefully that isn't the case, but this prayer is fine.
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Didn't Paul say something about praying to The Mystery?

For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

(Acts 17:23ff)
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LIB,MR BEARS said:

If it were called "mosque" I would would be shocked to hear Protestant theology.

It is called "chapel" I'm shocked to hear something outside of Protestant theology.

Is I stated earlier, if speakers are brought in from other faiths for the purpose of educating, then have that as part of the intro.

ie... Today, we are bringing in Elijah Nelson to speak to you about the LDS church.

Learning about other faiths can be helpful in how we work together as well as how we minister to others.

Baylor should not bring in other faiths cloaked as Christianity when that is not what it is.
I had a Mormon Spanish prof. The Dean of Music was a Jew.
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

If it were called "mosque" I would would be shocked to hear Protestant theology.

It is called "chapel" I'm shocked to hear something outside of Protestant theology.

Is I stated earlier, if speakers are brought in from other faiths for the purpose of educating, then have that as part of the intro.

ie... Today, we are bringing in Elijah Nelson to speak to you about the LDS church.

Learning about other faiths can be helpful in how we work together as well as how we minister to others.

Baylor should not bring in other faiths cloaked as Christianity when that is not what it is.
I had a Mormon Spanish prof. The Dean of Music was a Jew.
I had an English prof that was an Aggie. None of those things have anything to do with chapel
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ok, I watched the lecture. Sincere observations, not trying to be cruel or judgmental.
* One of the more unoriginal college lectures you'll see.
* White men, oil, America, capitalism, "toxic patriarchy (undefined)," all bad . . . very bad . . . everything that is wrong with the world.
* All was right in the world before we murdered Native Americans and shipped in slaves. (She ignores of course that Native Americans raped, murdered, and enslaved each other in unimaginable cruelty - children (born and unborn) often were fair game. Same goes for Africans, they enslaved each other and sold each other into slavery around the world. Slavery existed for centuries before. Always evil (to say the least) but we did not start it. The world has been a brutal place, with plenty of evil everywhere.)
* You could hear that same lecture hundreds of times each day in college classrooms everywhere.
* I don't think she once mentioned Jesus, Salvation, Christianity, or the Bible - could have missed one, but certainly none of it (or anything close) was part of her theme.
* On video, I did not see an incident. She remained composed throughout.
* If BU knew the material and approved it, I truly wonder why. How does it further the aim of Chapel? For that matter, what was original or redeeming about it any way? Students can turn on MSNBC any time and hear the same thing, and probably better articulated on MSNBC.
* I am Cherokee. Georgia Blue Ridge Mountain Cherokee.
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aliceinbubbleland said:

@BaylorFTW

Are these folks doomed in your opinion?


The bible says we all have sinned and are in need of a Savior. It also says if you draw near to God, he will draw near to you. Even if they never heard of Jesus, they would still have an awareness of God through their conscience and being a part of God's Creation. It is true there are some people in Heaven who never heard of the name Jesus such as those living before Jesus was born. I believe God judges people based on what they know. And I don't know what these folks knew or whether they sought out God.

However, if someone were to tell me that I belong to another faith and am a good person, why do I need Jesus? Or the other alternative is where they might say you think that everyone who doesn't think like you is going to Hell.

I would ask them 2 questions that Greg Koukl recommends:
1. Do you think that people who have done wrong should be punished?
2. Have you ever done anything wrong?

Most people including myself would say yes to both questions. And that would be real bad news for us because we would have to acknowledge that we earned Hell for our transgression against God.

But the good news is Jesus knew we could not pay such a debt so instead he acts as a pardon for our transgressions against God. This gesture by Jesus is what allows us to go to Heaven as he effectively pays our fine. This is why Jesus is the only way b/c he is the only one who solved the problem. God becomes a man so he can take the guilt upon himself so that we can be forgiven.

Notice it would not matter how great a person I was or all the good deeds I had done. Just as that would not work in our court system, my good deeds would not allow me to be deemed not guilty for say a murder charge or some other crime I committed. I would still be responsible for the wrong that I chose to do.

So based on this knowledge I would encourage all people to follow Jesus because I want them to go to Heaven.
ShooterTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sombear said:

Ok, I watched the lecture. Sincere observations, not trying to be cruel or judgmental.
* One of the more unoriginal college lectures you'll see.
* White men, oil, America, capitalism, "toxic patriarchy (undefined)," all bad . . . very bad . . . everything that is wrong with the world.
* All was right in the world before we murdered Native Americans and shipped in slaves. (She ignores of course that Native Americans raped, murdered, and enslaved each other in unimaginable cruelty - children (born and unborn) often were fair game. Same goes for Africans, they enslaved each other and sold each other into slavery around the world. Slavery existed for centuries before. Always evil (to say the least) but we did not start it. The world has been a brutal place, with plenty of evil everywhere.)
* You could hear that same lecture hundreds of times each day in college classrooms everywhere.
* I don't think she once mentioned Jesus, Salvation, Christianity, or the Bible - could have missed one, but certainly none of it (or anything close) was part of her theme.
* On video, I did not see an incident. She remained composed throughout.
* If BU knew the material and approved it, I truly wonder why. How does it further the aim of Chapel? For that matter, what was original or redeeming about it any way? Students can turn on MSNBC any time and hear the same thing, and probably better articulated on MSNBC.
* I am Cherokee. Georgia Blue Ridge Mountain Cherokee.

Pretty good summation, but you forgot colonization... she mentioned it alot and how it is super-duper evil.

And don't forget that slavery still exists today, but not in America.

Yeah... she never mentioned Jesus, the Bible or pretty much anything that could be considered theology at all. She did mention a Native American creation story, and how we can learn important lessons from it...so yeah... totally appropriate for a Baptist Chapel service.

Just to review: She prayed to "Mystery" twice, talked alot about connecting & learning from nature, never once mentioned Jesus or a Savior or Messiah or any other name for him, never referenced the Bible,... yet we are to agree that she is a Christian and a theologian of some kind.
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ShooterTX said:

sombear said:

Ok, I watched the lecture. Sincere observations, not trying to be cruel or judgmental.
* One of the more unoriginal college lectures you'll see.
* White men, oil, America, capitalism, "toxic patriarchy (undefined)," all bad . . . very bad . . . everything that is wrong with the world.
* All was right in the world before we murdered Native Americans and shipped in slaves. (She ignores of course that Native Americans raped, murdered, and enslaved each other in unimaginable cruelty - children (born and unborn) often were fair game. Same goes for Africans, they enslaved each other and sold each other into slavery around the world. Slavery existed for centuries before. Always evil (to say the least) but we did not start it. The world has been a brutal place, with plenty of evil everywhere.)
* You could hear that same lecture hundreds of times each day in college classrooms everywhere.
* I don't think she once mentioned Jesus, Salvation, Christianity, or the Bible - could have missed one, but certainly none of it (or anything close) was part of her theme.
* On video, I did not see an incident. She remained composed throughout.
* If BU knew the material and approved it, I truly wonder why. How does it further the aim of Chapel? For that matter, what was original or redeeming about it any way? Students can turn on MSNBC any time and hear the same thing, and probably better articulated on MSNBC.
* I am Cherokee. Georgia Blue Ridge Mountain Cherokee.

Pretty good summation, but you forgot colonization... she mentioned it alot and how it is super-duper evil.

And don't forget that slavery still exists today, but not in America.

Yeah... she never mentioned Jesus, the Bible or pretty much anything that could be considered theology at all. She did mention a Native American creation story, and how we can learn important lessons from it...so yeah... totally appropriate for a Baptist Chapel service.

Just to review: She prayed to "Mystery" twice, talked alot about connecting & learning from nature, never once mentioned Jesus or a Savior or Messiah or any other name for him, never referenced the Bible,... yet we are to agree that she is a Christian and a theologian of some kind.


Good points. As for the C word, I omitted it because I could not figure what she meant by it separate and sort from all the things she said were the problem - white men, capitalism, etc.
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, it looks like Kaitlin is enjoying the controversy and her notoriety. She changed her Twitter title to Kaitlin *probably pagan* Curtice.

She also made this tweet today:

"Mother Nature, she's the daughter of God and the source of all protection."
-- @BuffySteMarie



But even more interesting, is there appears to be some damage control going on by Baylor. Kaitlin is now claiming that Baylor Chapel threw her under the bus. She claims they knew what she was going to talk about and she did not veer off topic. This veer off topic language is what Baylor used in a letter they sent out to parents regarding the incident.



sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

Well, it looks like Kaitlin is enjoying the controversy and her notoriety. She changed her Twitter title to Kaitlin *probably pagan* Curtice.

She also made this tweet today:

"Mother Nature, she's the daughter of God and the source of all protection."
-- @BuffySteMarie



But even more interesting, is there appears to be some damage control going on by Baylor. Kaitlin is now claiming that Baylor Chapel threw her under the bus. She claims they knew what she was going to talk about and she did not veer off topic. This veer off topic language is what Baylor used in a letter they sent out to parents regarding the incident.






Classy ... she's now disparaging the university that invited (and paid) her to speak, so that she can sell more books. I don't think even Mother Nature would approve .... Hopefully moving forward, BU will do a better job screening potential speakers.
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

Well, it looks like Kaitlin is enjoying the controversy and her notoriety. She changed her Twitter title to Kaitlin *probably pagan* Curtice.

She also made this tweet today:

"Mother Nature, she's the daughter of God and the source of all protection."
-- @BuffySteMarie








This should put an end to any lingering idea that she is in some sense a Christian.
Mudbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She also just retweeted someone who said "Civility is not the goal, justice is"

I'm getting the hint that she did exactly what she wanted to at Baylor and now is playing victim. Anything to sell those books $$$$$$
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

BaylorFTW said:

Well, it looks like Kaitlin is enjoying the controversy and her notoriety. She changed her Twitter title to Kaitlin *probably pagan* Curtice.

She also made this tweet today:

"Mother Nature, she's the daughter of God and the source of all protection."
-- @BuffySteMarie








This should put an end to any lingering idea that she is in some sense a Christian.

Yep, I agree. If this is really her she's just another salesman, selling.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Forest Bueller said:

JXL said:

BaylorFTW said:

Well, it looks like Kaitlin is enjoying the controversy and her notoriety. She changed her Twitter title to Kaitlin *probably pagan* Curtice.

She also made this tweet today:

"Mother Nature, she's the daughter of God and the source of all protection."
-- @BuffySteMarie








This should put an end to any lingering idea that she is in some sense a Christian.

Yep, I agree. If this is really her she's just another salesman, selling.

Sounds like she did not convince you. Has there been a mass defection among the students who were present?

Funny how free speech works.
FormerFlash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I can't stand people like this. They look for opportunities to stir things up and then the second there is backlash they act like a victim all the while reveling in the attention. Do better, Baylor. Don't bring this garbage into a chapel service only to be drug through the mud in the public square. Another PR debacle for this administration.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".
People in many fields other than theology tend to think their own opinions are right. Scientists and historians are particularly bad about that.
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FormerFlash said:

I can't stand people like this. They look for opportunities to stir things up and then the second there is backlash they act like a victim all the while reveling in the attention. Do better, Baylor. Don't bring this garbage into a chapel service only to be drug through the mud in the public square. Another PR debacle for this administration.



Annoyance, yes.
Debacle? No.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".

My last church was majority Republican but politics never stopped the congregation from being Christ-centered. It simply didn't matter.


So in your opinion, praying to other gods in contravention to the commandment "have no other gods before Me" is just another "flavor" of Christianity. I see.
She didn't do that. Oh, wait, you still think she said "mother mystery"...

No, that can't be it. Did you hear someone pray to the govt?


Oh wait, you think she prayed to the Father instead of "mystery". As a genre of fiction it's fine. As a god to pray to, not so much.


Nothing wrong with mystery. My former pastor did his doctoral thesis on the trinity and humbly acknowledged the mystery of god from the pulpit. That's why a common truism is "the lord moves in mysterious ways". There's a complete study program on the mystery of god. You could look it up.
I don't see any indication in her speech or on her blog that she is referring to the Trinity, but if so that's great. YC confused the issue by misquoting her; clarifying it seems to be the least of her concerns.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".

My last church was majority Republican but politics never stopped the congregation from being Christ-centered. It simply didn't matter.


So in your opinion, praying to other gods in contravention to the commandment "have no other gods before Me" is just another "flavor" of Christianity. I see.
She didn't do that. Oh, wait, you still think she said "mother mystery"...

No, that can't be it. Did you hear someone pray to the govt?


Oh wait, you think she prayed to the Father instead of "mystery". As a genre of fiction it's fine. As a god to pray to, not so much.


Nothing wrong with mystery. My former pastor did his doctoral thesis on the trinity and humbly acknowledged the mystery of god from the pulpit. That's why a common truism is "the lord moves in mysterious ways". There's a complete study program on the mystery of god. You could look it up.
I don't see any indication in her speech or on her blog that she is referring to the Trinity, but if so that's great. YC confused the issue by misquoting her, and clarifying it seems to be the least of her concerns.
She seems to be a dingbat.

And people are scared of her speech.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aliceinbubbleland said:

Quote:

However, chapel is chapel. Baylor is a Christian university that believes Jesus is the savior and son of God and the Bible is the word of God. Obviously, there is plenty of room for debate and interpretation within that, but nothing outside of that should be presented at chapel, and that should be the core message of chapel. It's about helping students grow in their faith. Other university events, of course. I'm all for that.

Here is where we differ. Education is about challenging thought. Why should any believer be afraid of someone thinking differently then they do? Why draw a curtain about Chapel? The only curtain that should be drawn around Chapel is politics. I know nothing of this woman but the part I quoted in previous post regarding her prayer seems harmless. Did she ask the first time attenders to join her movement or just join her prayer?
It's not about someone thinking differently from me. It's about someone misrepresenting me. When you hold yourself out as a Christian, you're not speaking only for yourself. You're speaking for a community and a tradition.

Many here are rightly passionate about the expression of different views. If KC truly has a different view, why be afraid to simply express it? Why decorate it with the trappings of an oppressive belief system?
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Quote:

However, chapel is chapel. Baylor is a Christian university that believes Jesus is the savior and son of God and the Bible is the word of God. Obviously, there is plenty of room for debate and interpretation within that, but nothing outside of that should be presented at chapel, and that should be the core message of chapel. It's about helping students grow in their faith. Other university events, of course. I'm all for that.

Here is where we differ. Education is about challenging thought. Why should any believer be afraid of someone thinking differently then they do? Why draw a curtain about Chapel? The only curtain that should be drawn around Chapel is politics. I know nothing of this woman but the part I quoted in previous post regarding her prayer seems harmless. Did she ask the first time attenders to join her movement or just join her prayer?
It's not about someone thinking differently from me. It's about someone misrepresenting me. When you hold yourself out as a Christian, you're not speaking only for yourself. You're speaking for a community and a tradition.

Many here are rightly passionate about the expression of different views. If KC truly has a different view, why be afraid to simply express it? Why decorate it with the trappings of an oppressive belief system?
Sam, thin ice here.
Some on this board believe the Pope is the anti-Christ and that Catholics aren't Christians. I disagree, but allowing a Catholic to speak in Chapel leaves Baylor open to the charge of misrepresenting someone.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ShooterTX said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Quote:

However, chapel is chapel. Baylor is a Christian university that believes Jesus is the savior and son of God and the Bible is the word of God. Obviously, there is plenty of room for debate and interpretation within that, but nothing outside of that should be presented at chapel, and that should be the core message of chapel. It's about helping students grow in their faith. Other university events, of course. I'm all for that.

Here is where we differ. Education is about challenging thought. Why should any believer be afraid of someone thinking differently then they do? Why draw a curtain about Chapel? The only curtain that should be drawn around Chapel is politics. I know nothing of this woman but the part I quoted in previous post regarding her prayer seems harmless. Did she ask the first time attenders to join her movement or just join her prayer?

The problem is that Chapel is not the forum for academic or philosophical education, but for theological education. Her speech would have been totally appropriate as a special speaker event on Thursday night or something along those lines. This kind of politically, "social justice" charged speech is not appropriate for Chapel.

I am only about half way through the video of her talk. It opens with prayer, then songs of worship, then a reading of the Bible, then she is introduced.... does this sound like a typical lecture hall to anyone? This is Chapel, not Social Justice 101.

They should not have scheduled a speaker who spends 80% of her time talking about Native American (pagan) relgionous thoughts and 00.1% of her time on Jesus & the Bible.... for Chapel. They should have scheduled her as a special speaker in a different venue.

She may claim to be a Christian, but the Bible is very clear that there will be many who claim Christ, but He will say that they never knew Him. I would say that she fits into that category, based upon her speech and her social media posts.
Wokeness is a religion in its own right. It may not involve the supernatural, but psychologically and sociologically it occupies the same space. See for example her comment that we can never be whole without the work of decolonization. Sad news for all those generations of people who thought Jesus was enough.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Quote:

However, chapel is chapel. Baylor is a Christian university that believes Jesus is the savior and son of God and the Bible is the word of God. Obviously, there is plenty of room for debate and interpretation within that, but nothing outside of that should be presented at chapel, and that should be the core message of chapel. It's about helping students grow in their faith. Other university events, of course. I'm all for that.

Here is where we differ. Education is about challenging thought. Why should any believer be afraid of someone thinking differently then they do? Why draw a curtain about Chapel? The only curtain that should be drawn around Chapel is politics. I know nothing of this woman but the part I quoted in previous post regarding her prayer seems harmless. Did she ask the first time attenders to join her movement or just join her prayer?
It's not about someone thinking differently from me. It's about someone misrepresenting me. When you hold yourself out as a Christian, you're not speaking only for yourself. You're speaking for a community and a tradition.

Many here are rightly passionate about the expression of different views. If KC truly has a different view, why be afraid to simply express it? Why decorate it with the trappings of an oppressive belief system?
Sam, thin ice here.
Some on this board believe the Pope is the anti-Christ and that Catholics aren't Christians. I disagree, but allowing a Catholic to speak in Chapel leaves Baylor open to the charge of misrepresenting someone.

I think the Reformation did a lot of damage. It pales in comparison to what neopaganism could do.
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

Bearitto said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".

My last church was majority Republican but politics never stopped the congregation from being Christ-centered. It simply didn't matter.


So in your opinion, praying to other gods in contravention to the commandment "have no other gods before Me" is just another "flavor" of Christianity. I see.
She didn't do that. Oh, wait, you still think she said "mother mystery"...

No, that can't be it. Did you hear someone pray to the govt?


Oh wait, you think she prayed to the Father instead of "mystery". As a genre of fiction it's fine. As a god to pray to, not so much.


Nothing wrong with mystery. My former pastor did his doctoral thesis on the trinity and humbly acknowledged the mystery of god from the pulpit. That's why a common truism is "the lord moves in mysterious ways". There's a complete study program on the mystery of god. You could look it up.
I don't see any indication in her speech or on her blog that she is referring to the Trinity, but if so that's great. YC confused the issue by misquoting her, and clarifying it seems to be the least of her concerns.
She seems to be a dingbat.

And people are scared of her speech.
What post suggests anyone is "scared?" Opining that BU should not have invited her to lead Chapel; criticizing her worn out, cliched, left wing, political speech for what it was; and questioning her motives in blowing this out of proportion, does not mean folks are scared. Posters have said these speakers are more than welcome to speak in other forums (again, many BU professors already recite the same anti-American talking points in class). But, why is a purely political message with zero connection to Christianity appropriate for Chapel? I'd say the same thing if a speaker came to Chapel with a secular diatribe on low taxes, 2nd Amendment rights, and building walls. And, I guarantee the reaction from the left would involve more than one rogue remark. Heck, protestors would likely block the doors or at least shout the speaker down.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LIB,MR BEARS said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

If it were called "mosque" I would would be shocked to hear Protestant theology.

It is called "chapel" I'm shocked to hear something outside of Protestant theology.

Is I stated earlier, if speakers are brought in from other faiths for the purpose of educating, then have that as part of the intro.

ie... Today, we are bringing in Elijah Nelson to speak to you about the LDS church.

Learning about other faiths can be helpful in how we work together as well as how we minister to others.

Baylor should not bring in other faiths cloaked as Christianity when that is not what it is.
I had a Mormon Spanish prof. The Dean of Music was a Jew.
I had an English prof that was an Aggie. None of those things have anything to do with chapel
Chapel was 2 hours a week. Spanish 3 hours a week. I'm still not a Mormon. None of the music majors I knew converted to Judaism.

And I guarantee you the "Other faiths cloaked as Christianity" charge has been made before about Christian profs at Baylor. Narrowly defined limits get you worked up about heretics.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".
People in many fields other than theology tend to think their own opinions are right. Scientists and historians are particularly bad about that.
Strongly disagree. First, science recognizes objective facts. NOMA.

Second, even historians recognize different schools of thought without denying that members of the other school are in fact historians.

What we are looking at here is the claim that only the orthodox are Christian.

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...
Aliceinbubbleland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...

LOL. No kidding. Some on this thread think they are the entitled.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".
People in many fields other than theology tend to think their own opinions are right. Scientists and historians are particularly bad about that.
Strongly disagree. First, science recognizes objective facts. NOMA.

Second, even historians recognize different schools of thought without denying that members of the other school are in fact historians.

What we are looking at here is the claim that only the orthodox are Christian.

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...
Theology claims to recognize objective facts (sometimes even empirical facts). Essential to NOMA is the principle that science cannot judge this claim.

More to the point, no one is saying that a heretical theologian isn't a theologian (some of the ones Waco47 used to cite actually were not, but I digress). The question is whether the person is a Christian theologian. If you promote yourself as a historical materialist and fill your books with great man theory, you can expect to get called on it.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".
People in many fields other than theology tend to think their own opinions are right. Scientists and historians are particularly bad about that.
Strongly disagree. First, science recognizes objective facts. NOMA.

Second, even historians recognize different schools of thought without denying that members of the other school are in fact historians.

What we are looking at here is the claim that only the orthodox are Christian.

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...
Theology claims to recognize objective facts (sometimes even empirical facts). Essential to NOMA is the principle that science cannot judge this claim.

More to the point, no is saying that a heretical theologian isn't a theologian (some of the ones Waco47 used to cite actually were not, but I digress). The question is whether the person a Christian theologian. If you promote yourself as a historical materialist and fill your books with great man theory, you can expect to get called on it.

Gourd says Shoe and Sandal aren't Brianists.
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aliceinbubbleland said:

Quote:

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...

LOL. No kidding. Some on this thread think they are the entitled.


I'm a committed, theologically-conservative Christian, but very much enjoy studying all the Christian views on heaven - from there is no heaven, to everyone goes to heaven, to only Christians (however defined) go to heaven. I think there are solid theological arguments across this spectrum. My brother is a Christian professor, wrote a book on this, and has a more liberal view. That said, BU has a clear position on this. Y'all appear to be mocking BU's position and the position of billions of Christians. That's your right, but it's an odd forum in which to exercise that right.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...
And more will be surprised who isn't
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

Aliceinbubbleland said:

Bearitto said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

I expect Baylor to have speakers with differing political views, even controversial political views. I've no problem with that.

When it comes to Christianity however, there is a "framework" that should always be there. Can there be differing views on some things? Sure. But, in the words of Alistair Begg, " the plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things." When we start adding to or taking away from that while teaching, we are misleading others and are creating false gods.

BU needs to be very careful that they choose speakers that have the ability to stay true to the faith while presenting a variety of political views.


The problem is, it's virtually impossible to be a Christian and a leftist. You can't worship God and government simultaneously.
What a stupid statement. But then I'd expect nothing better from a religious bigot.
I think Christians can have differing political views. However, can you backup your statement?

Then maybe you should have jumped in on bearitto. One thing I don't miss about Christians is the "my flavor is better than yours because mine is the only flavor".
People in many fields other than theology tend to think their own opinions are right. Scientists and historians are particularly bad about that.
Strongly disagree. First, science recognizes objective facts. NOMA.

Second, even historians recognize different schools of thought without denying that members of the other school are in fact historians.

What we are looking at here is the claim that only the orthodox are Christian.

If there is a heaven you guys are gonna be surprised about who all is there...
Theology claims to recognize objective facts (sometimes even empirical facts). Essential to NOMA is the principle that science cannot judge this claim.

More to the point, no is saying that a heretical theologian isn't a theologian (some of the ones Waco47 used to cite actually were not, but I digress). The question is whether the person a Christian theologian. If you promote yourself as a historical materialist and fill your books with great man theory, you can expect to get called on it.

Gourd says Shoe and Sandal aren't Brianists.
It's easy to scoff at distinctions that don't mean anything to you. So let's put the shoe on the other foot. When some posters identify you as a socialist and you reject that identity, are you committing a fallacy?
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sombear said:

Osodecentx said:

She seems to be a dingbat.

And people are scared of her speech.
What post suggests anyone is "scared?" Opining that BU should not have invited her to lead Chapel; criticizing her worn out, cliched, left wing, political speech for what it was; and questioning her motives in blowing this out of proportion, does not mean folks are scared. Posters have said these speakers are more than welcome to speak in other forums (again, many BU professors already recite the same anti-American talking points in class). But, why is a purely political message with zero connection to Christianity appropriate for Chapel? I'd say the same thing if a speaker came to Chapel with a secular diatribe on low taxes, 2nd Amendment rights, and building walls. And, I guarantee the reaction from the left would involve more than one rogue remark. Heck, protestors would likely block the doors or at least shout the speaker down.
How about this post from page 1 near the bottom.

"Not worrying about it led us to this point. For this to take place means that people definitely should start worrying about it. Obviously, the administration can't be trusted as they green lit this and this happened after the other debacle with the liberal, gay affirming, white man bashing minister at the commencement from last year. Christians have to stand up and defend the faith. Whatever they decide to do, letting it slide should not be an option."
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

sombear said:

Osodecentx said:

She seems to be a dingbat.

And people are scared of her speech.
What post suggests anyone is "scared?" Opining that BU should not have invited her to lead Chapel; criticizing her worn out, cliched, left wing, political speech for what it was; and questioning her motives in blowing this out of proportion, does not mean folks are scared. Posters have said these speakers are more than welcome to speak in other forums (again, many BU professors already recite the same anti-American talking points in class). But, why is a purely political message with zero connection to Christianity appropriate for Chapel? I'd say the same thing if a speaker came to Chapel with a secular diatribe on low taxes, 2nd Amendment rights, and building walls. And, I guarantee the reaction from the left would involve more than one rogue remark. Heck, protestors would likely block the doors or at least shout the speaker down.
How about this post from page 1 near the bottom.

"Not worrying about it led us to this point. For this to take place means that people definitely should start worrying about it. Obviously, the administration can't be trusted as they green lit this and this happened after the other debacle with the liberal, gay affirming, white man bashing minister at the commencement from last year. Christians have to stand up and defend the faith. Whatever they decide to do, letting it slide should not be an option."
I don't think that's scared. It's disagreeing with something, saying we can't just sit back and let it happen, and suggesting action.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sombear said:

Osodecentx said:

sombear said:

Osodecentx said:

She seems to be a dingbat.

And people are scared of her speech.
What post suggests anyone is "scared?" Opining that BU should not have invited her to lead Chapel; criticizing her worn out, cliched, left wing, political speech for what it was; and questioning her motives in blowing this out of proportion, does not mean folks are scared. Posters have said these speakers are more than welcome to speak in other forums (again, many BU professors already recite the same anti-American talking points in class). But, why is a purely political message with zero connection to Christianity appropriate for Chapel? I'd say the same thing if a speaker came to Chapel with a secular diatribe on low taxes, 2nd Amendment rights, and building walls. And, I guarantee the reaction from the left would involve more than one rogue remark. Heck, protestors would likely block the doors or at least shout the speaker down.
How about this post from page 1 near the bottom.

"Not worrying about it led us to this point. For this to take place means that people definitely should start worrying about it. Obviously, the administration can't be trusted as they green lit this and this happened after the other debacle with the liberal, gay affirming, white man bashing minister at the commencement from last year. Christians have to stand up and defend the faith. Whatever they decide to do, letting it slide should not be an option."
I don't think that's scared. It's disagreeing with something, saying we can't just sit back and let it happen, and suggesting action.
okay
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.