I simply do not understand how forcing others to comply with “Christian” values through laws, regulation, or any type of political and economic influence creates in those needing Christ, a desire to look to Him.

I can only imagine what the world would be like, if we loved every one with the same energy that we spend vilifying those political foes we are in conflict with.

How is this Hindu minister going to think of Christians now? He will always remember them as excluders, condemners. Where is the love of Jesus?

Government-sponsored prayers whether they be in the chambers of Congress or during the graduation ceremony of a public high school are two such examples. No prophetic witness to be had there….

Wiley Drake and others of his ilk may desire to impose their faith on others through any means necessary. But a coerced faith is really no faith at all. Voluntarism. For religious faith to be authentic, it must be free and cannot be coerced. One comes to Jesus Christ freely or one does not really come to Jesus Christ. One accepts the Christian faith voluntarily or not authentically.

The principle of voluntarism goes out of the window when children and even adults are forced to listen to Christians or whomever pray (and in some cases preach!). Thankfully, this is why teachers don’t recite Bible verses and read government-written prayers in the classroom etc. etc….

We have bigger issues to deal with than whether Congress opens each session with an insipid prayer. But such acts of Civil Religion do trivialize and water down authentic faith – which I find in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

And your description of Hinduism as, “…a variety of beliefs including monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, monism and even atheism,” is pretty accurate. But I would submit that any “faith” that is in any way defined by polytheism is, by sheer definition, polytheistic.

Back home we say, “They believe in so much, they don’t believe in anything at all.”

I simply cannot fathom regarding (as you seem to) the claim of Christ to be “the way,” the only way to the Father, is idolatrous. It’s just the Gospel.

The people who yelled and screamed were out of line, I’ll admit. In moments like these I just scream on the inside.

Don’t you think it would be a mistake for any person to view any religion as one uniform, monolithic group?

Do they even offer comparative religions courses at Luther Rice and the New Southern Baptist Theological Seminary?

They did at the University of Georgia.

No postmodernity. The diversity of Hinduism clearly allow for a variety of beliefs including monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, monism and even atheism. My original statement is quite acceptable in the academy. Look up Huston Smith – one of the most preeminent comparative religion scholars in the world.

If you narrowly define monotheistic to mean Jewish or Christian – well no sir, the Hindu Chaplain’s prayer doesn’t fit that bill. But neither does GW’s.

Also, Hinduism is not necessarily polytheistic. To many, Hinduism is completely monotheistic. A diverse religion indeed.

Now that was one line of many from my post. If you have something to contribute concerning the entire post – (your feelings on Civil Religion, the actions of the protesters, etc…) then please contribute.

Are you suggesting that GW’s prayers to “nature’s God” is similar to our Hindu’s “Deity Supreme”?

With that, I am…

Peter

Seriously, I want to know: Do y’all want freedom of religion for everyone or just the ones that you think fit within the realm of Christian?

If a Senator – who presumably has freedom of religion – asks a Hindu – who presumably has freedom of religion – to pray, why would we stop that? Are you calling for freedom of religion, but on a “Don’t ask/Don’t tell” sort of policy if that religion isn’t mainstream Christian?

Surely you don’t want to legalize only Christianity??! (I don’t think anyone does, but I’m not sure what conclusion to draw from those opposed to this hindu prayer.)