Here we go...
We have some here rebuking others for liking the fact a Christian prayed...
I don't think we have anyone rebuking other for likening the fact that a Christian prayed. Since I am specifically referenced in your criticism, I need to point out that I think the pastor SHOULD be praying for those students. So you are misrepresenting at least my point if view, and likely everyone else's.
...by rebuking such via a hypothesis what if a Mormon prayed, whilst rebuking via insult that one perchance would like an Islamic Imam to pray with these children...
And what is wrong with that? It is a valid question if we are going to discuss whether or not we want government authorities to encourage and lead children to worship to whatever deity or deities they prefer.
...which shows it is doubtful that either of these doing the rebuking would even DARE to pray themselves...
This is a non sequitur. It shows nothing of the sort. This has nothing to do with courage, level of faith, etc. This is simply an opportunity to condemn those with whom you disagree.
...all the while these same infer condemnation toward the Christian for praying...
By pointing out that he is rejecting the historic Baptist position, violating the rules of his employers, and then complaining about it?
...whilst one other brave and biblical one is pointing out it is better to obey God rather than man.
Who says that we don't agree it is better to obey God rather than man? Where has God said to use your authority as a government official to get other people (whether they are of the faith or not) to indulge in religious behavior?
Only the latter reflects true, powerful world-rejecting Christianity.
I agree with what RevMitchell has written, although I do not necessarily know his opinion regarding this issue. You have condemned the rest of us as not reflecting "true" Christianity which comes very close to violating Baptist Board rules. Moreover, you have done it with no evidence.
The rest of you are hoodwinked into political correctness and I highly doubt any of you would obey God rather than man.
And you are wrong.
Have you studied Baptist history? Do you know the story of Roger Williams in America? Have you read of what our Baptist forebearers went through to worship freely in the colonies? Look up the story of Obadiah Holmes for example. Have you read "A Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments" written by James Madison? Have you ever heard of John Leland? Have you read the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom that was drafted by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, which became one of the most influential documents for the First Amendment? Do you realize that Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was directly referenced Rogers Williams' metaphor of a "hedge of separation between church and state" which plainly described the intent of the First Amendment?
I could go on and on. This is not "political correctness," but Baptist and U.S. history. The theology standing behind it is rooted in the New Testament. The rationale behind it is the way the church has been prostituted and corrupted by earthly powers throughout history when it gains "favored" status, or persecuted when another religious system has "favored" status. The best case is when the government is forced to remain neutral and stay out of religious affairs. It does this by restraining its functionaries from using its influence or power to promote or restrict religious exercise.
Those of us who oppose what this pastor did are obeying God.
If you disagree, why not make a case for it instead of personally attacking those with whom you disagree?
