It's comments like this that make me wish we had a *double-upvote invocation for points.

Thanks, @VoodooV coming here to say what I wanted to say.
>> ^VoodooV:
That's exactly it.

People don't downvote shinyblurry or bobknight33 or etc's videos/comments because of political idealogy (well i'm sure some do) They downvote because they commit numerous logical fallacies over and over again that are demonstrably incorrect. Shinyblurry's argument of having a personal experience, thus equating god as fact may work for him, but that does not give him grounds for him to make his evangelical "it's my faith, therefore it's also fact" arguments. I can't downvote myself, but I would if I could.

Just the other day, bobknight33 made his comment about how we're the ones who don't really know what the founders believed and they were all devout christians. This is a provably false statement. It has nothing to do with idealogy.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^gwiz665:
There's a philosophical difference between a downvote on a video and a downvote on a comment.
On a video it's either "this does not belong on videosift" or by extension "this is so bad i don't want this on videosift", while a comment is close to "i don't like/agree with what was written here"

Hmmm, as someone who only recently gained the ability to downvote, I do it differently. A downvote on a video to me is just "this video isn't very good", regardless of the stance it's taking. Similarly a downvote on a comment has more to do with the merit of the argument rather than the position. I've upvoted people I disagree with who argued their point well, and downvoted because the comment is irrelevant, pointless, fallacious, etc.
Much as he annoys me, I try not to downvote @shinyblurry, because I believe he genuinely believes in what he's saying (regardless of how factually incorrect it might be).


That's exactly it.

People don't downvote shinyblurry or bobknight33 or etc's videos/comments because of political idealogy (well i'm sure some do) They downvote because they commit numerous logical fallacies over and over again that are demonstrably incorrect. Shinyblurry's argument of having a personal experience, thus equating god as fact may work for him, but that does not give him grounds for him to make his evangelical "it's my faith, therefore it's also fact" arguments. I can't downvote myself, but I would if I could.

Just the other day, bobknight33 made his comment about how we're the ones who don't really know what the founders believed and they were all devout christians. This is a provably false statement. It has nothing to do with idealogy.

As i've stated in the past, people like them drop their bombs and run away. The vast majority of the time they never stick around to argue/defend their position. They just wait for the next controversial sift so they can drop their bomb again and run away. Sure shinyblurry will actually attempt to argue his position so he's one of the exceptions, but it's that same "I believe, therefore it's true" argument over and over again and it's a fallacy.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Jesus Camp (controversial 2006 Evangelical documentary). Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

I have to admit I find this pretty shocking myself. I personally don't believe that stoning is ever a justifiable action for anything, ever, period. What I find incredible is that I'm even having to take a stance AGAINST stoning in this day and age. Although of course it still goes on legally in several countries. This fact doesn't make it acceptable, it just makes it more disgusting.

Shiny, personally I'm disappointed. I was ready to give it a shot and read the bible all the way through, to give it the benefit of the doubt and try to approach it and what you said with an open mind. I saw this video and thought for sure you would dismiss it as false or something similar, but to see you essentially defending it, I just can't accept that the actions described in this verse are moral. I will never accept them as moral.

If this makes ME immoral in god's eyes than Shiny you had better get some stones ready because here's another sinner deserving of sinner's death.


>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^shinyblurry:
The proof that you're not is that you give no regard to the sin itself. You are using a relative standard to judge his crime, whereas God uses an absolute standard. There is no such thing as a minor sin in Gods eyes. God is holy and His standard is moral perfection. Moral perfection is what God calls good, and everything short of that is evil. He has also ordained the death penalty for all sin.
Neither was the crime itself picking up sticks. The actual crime was rebellion. It is not a minor thing to break Gods law, which the man knew full well he was doing. God punished Him not only for rebellion, but also as a public example to the rest of Israel that His laws were to be taken seriously. You have to remember that the Jews were His chosen people, and that they had entered into a covenant with God willingly. They agreed to follow His laws and adhere to His standards, and His standard was that they would be holy as He is holy. This meant that they would obey His law unceasingly with no exceptions. They also agreed with God that if they did not obey His law, they would incur the penalties He laid out.
I will agree that stoning is a particularly harsh punishment, but while you don't think the punishment fits the crime, that is because you don't understand how bad sin really is. Consider for a moment that what I said earlier is true, that one sin led to all of the madness that we see in the world today. If you can comprehend that, maybe you'll start to get the idea why God would use such a punishment as a deterrent.
You say there is no way a loving God would ever do that, to which I reply, that a loving God would do everything possible, including invoking extremely harsh punishments, to prevent as much sin as possible and protect His creation from the greatest amount of harm. To not take extreme measures against sin would actually be a point against Him, and not for Him.
>> ^Asmo:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I'll address it. I think stoning was used as a deterrent. He ordained an admittedly harsh punishment to keep His people from sin. While you don't see sin as a big deal, it is what caused the corruption of this entire world and all of the suffering therein. Every negative thing that has ever happened here stemmed from just one sin, and each of us have committed hundreds, if not thousands of sins. Sin is a big deal and I feel that punishment was a reflection of the seriousness of sin.
Look up stoning videos on Liveleak sometime and tell me how a supposed god of infinite love would prescribe it for collecting firewood on the sabbath... I condemn people who use stoning as monsters. By any standard, it appears that I am morally superior to your god... = P


Hi, shinyblurry.
I haven't responded to any of your posts in a while, but this time your answer made me throw up in my mouth a little so I thought I'd chime in. Let me read back to you what you just said:
"Moral perfection is what God calls good, and everything short of that is evil. He has also ordained the death penalty for all sin."
But in the Christian tradition, the ONLY being capable of moral perfection is God himself. Humans can strive for it, but never achieve it. So what you have essentially said is that God created imperfect creatures and now punishes them repeatedly, mercilessly, and arbitrarily with death for being imperfect. That doesn't sound much like a loving (or rational) God to me.
"I will agree that stoning is a particularly harsh punishment, but while you don't think the punishment fits the crime, that is because you don't understand how bad sin really is. Consider for a moment that what I said earlier is true, that one sin led to all of the madness that we see in the world today. If you can comprehend that, maybe you'll start to get the idea why God would use such a punishment as a deterrent."
Except that "deterrent" didn't work, did it? After Numbers 32-36 there are countless more examples of the people sinning in the Bible. So you're basically saying the poor guy in this passage died for nothing and that the supposedly omnipotent God who commanded the death was unable to see that this deterrence would fail. Nevermind that picking up sticks is treated as a far worse form of "rebellion" than the other various sins recounted both before and after this story in the Bible in which many of the characters are given less severe punishments or the chance to repent. So much for the Christian god being a god of mercy...
These kinds of contradictions and irrationalities are apparent to anyone who takes even a brief moment to consider them... and you wonder why the Sift isn't flocking to your evangelical banner?

>> ^shinyblurry:

The proof that you're not is that you give no regard to the sin itself. You are using a relative standard to judge his crime, whereas God uses an absolute standard. There is no such thing as a minor sin in Gods eyes. God is holy and His standard is moral perfection. Moral perfection is what God calls good, and everything short of that is evil. He has also ordained the death penalty for all sin.
Neither was the crime itself picking up sticks. The actual crime was rebellion. It is not a minor thing to break Gods law, which the man knew full well he was doing. God punished Him not only for rebellion, but also as a public example to the rest of Israel that His laws were to be taken seriously. You have to remember that the Jews were His chosen people, and that they had entered into a covenant with God willingly. They agreed to follow His laws and adhere to His standards, and His standard was that they would be holy as He is holy. This meant that they would obey His law unceasingly with no exceptions. They also agreed with God that if they did not obey His law, they would incur the penalties He laid out.
I will agree that stoning is a particularly harsh punishment, but while you don't think the punishment fits the crime, that is because you don't understand how bad sin really is. Consider for a moment that what I said earlier is true, that one sin led to all of the madness that we see in the world today. If you can comprehend that, maybe you'll start to get the idea why God would use such a punishment as a deterrent.
You say there is no way a loving God would ever do that, to which I reply, that a loving God would do everything possible, including invoking extremely harsh punishments, to prevent as much sin as possible and protect His creation from the greatest amount of harm. To not take extreme measures against sin would actually be a point against Him, and not for Him.
>> ^Asmo:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I'll address it. I think stoning was used as a deterrent. He ordained an admittedly harsh punishment to keep His people from sin. While you don't see sin as a big deal, it is what caused the corruption of this entire world and all of the suffering therein. Every negative thing that has ever happened here stemmed from just one sin, and each of us have committed hundreds, if not thousands of sins. Sin is a big deal and I feel that punishment was a reflection of the seriousness of sin.
Look up stoning videos on Liveleak sometime and tell me how a supposed god of infinite love would prescribe it for collecting firewood on the sabbath... I condemn people who use stoning as monsters. By any standard, it appears that I am morally superior to your god... = P



Hi, shinyblurry.

I haven't responded to any of your posts in a while, but this time your answer made me throw up in my mouth a little so I thought I'd chime in. Let me read back to you what you just said:

"Moral perfection is what God calls good, and everything short of that is evil. He has also ordained the death penalty for all sin."

But in the Christian tradition, the ONLY being capable of moral perfection is God himself. Humans can strive for it, but never achieve it. So what you have essentially said is that God created imperfect creatures and now punishes them repeatedly, mercilessly, and arbitrarily with death for being imperfect. That doesn't sound much like a loving (or rational) God to me.

"I will agree that stoning is a particularly harsh punishment, but while you don't think the punishment fits the crime, that is because you don't understand how bad sin really is. Consider for a moment that what I said earlier is true, that one sin led to all of the madness that we see in the world today. If you can comprehend that, maybe you'll start to get the idea why God would use such a punishment as a deterrent."

Except that "deterrent" didn't work, did it? After Numbers 32-36 there are countless more examples of the people sinning in the Bible. So you're basically saying the poor guy in this passage died for nothing and that the supposedly omnipotent God who commanded the death was unable to see that this deterrence would fail. Nevermind that picking up sticks is treated as a far worse form of "rebellion" than the other various sins recounted both before and after this story in the Bible in which many of the characters are given less severe punishments or the chance to repent. So much for the Christian god being a god of mercy...

These kinds of contradictions and irrationalities are apparent to anyone who takes even a brief moment to consider them... and you wonder why the Sift isn't flocking to your evangelical banner?

i just came by to drop a line and let you know it pleases me that you will change your tone when confronted on certain matters.
to be specific your exchange with hpqp.

not many evangelicals would recognize a fault or a misplaced intent and change direction in how they communicate with another.

i totally understand you are doing your duty commanded by god to spread the word but it hurts your cause when you leave a bad taste in someones mouth.
passive aggressive or trollish comments tend to have that result.

you are human and not impervious to react.i understand this as well but it appears that you sometimes take offense whenever evangelicals are targeted.
there is no reason for you to feel that way.
not all evangelicals are the same.
they are people,like you and i,who are varied as they are different in their theosophy.they read and perceive the word differently.this is the way of things.
sometimes they are just plain wrong and maybe in need of someone pointing that out to them.
other times they may be right and in need of defense.
discernment my friend....discernment.

you have mentioned in the past that ultimately it is god who can help change someones heart.
i agree..in theory anyways.
so why not take that stance when conversing with self-avowed atheist?
allow your words to reveal how god has changed your heart and leave the passive-aggressive and defensive comments behind you?
they are irrelevant and unproductive and leaves a bad taste in peoples mouth concerning they very thing you are trying to promote.

you may never change an athiests opinion about god or religion but you CAN change their opinion concerning YOU.
and maybe..just maybe..when/if god enters their life they will remember you with fondness and warmth.
possibly understand a bit more.

its just an idea.

>> ^hpqp:

@shinyblurry (and @Morganth), you might be surprised to hear this from me, but I am all for having chaplains (of all faiths) in the military that soldiers of faith can go to. I don't think they provide the same help professional psychiatrists could but it's probably better than nothing. The way the US abandons its troops to the psychological trauma they face is truly outrageous; so far we seem to be in agreement.
But as @enoch pointed out, the point of this video is to call out the sly, cowardly tactics of evangelical missionaries in the army who take advantage of the traumatizing nature of war to bully people into belief when they are at their most vulnerable. It's a bit like stuffing fearful stories about eternal torture into the heads of small children (oh wait...).


I agree on the point that no one should use psychological manipulation to try to bring someone to Christ. It will only result in a false conversion, save the Lords grace. They believe they are doing a good thing, but the goal isn't numbers. We preach the gospel, but God is the one who changes the heart. Without a change of heart, there is no real change of mind. That said, it is the truth that man is a stubborn creature who, when things are going well, thinks nothing about God. It's only when things take a turn that he realizes his need for God. Man is naturally rebellious against God, and that is just the reality of his nature. Many people need to hit rock bottom before they will change, and God will bring them there if He has to.

@shinyblurry (and @Morganth), you might be surprised to hear this from me, but I am all for having chaplains (of all faiths) in the military that soldiers of faith can go to. I don't think they provide the same help professional psychiatrists could but it's probably better than nothing. The way the US abandons its troops to the psychological trauma they face is truly outrageous; so far we seem to be in agreement.

But as @enoch pointed out, the point of this video is to call out the sly, cowardly tactics of evangelical missionaries in the army who take advantage of the traumatizing nature of war to bully people into belief when they are at their most vulnerable. It's a bit like stuffing fearful stories about eternal torture into the heads of small children (oh wait...).

@shinyblurry

i totally get the point.
your comment was a passive aggressive jab at hpqp.

@hpqp has a valid point in regards to taking advantage of a persons weakened emotional and mental state to spread the word.
using this video we are shown an almost glee from the hand-full of evangelicals represented here in exploiting these weakened (and therefore malleable) and i find it disgusting,reprehensible and yes..outrageous.
the glee is something that has me particularly enraged.how DARE they pervert the word in order to promote their own twisted understanding.
they should feel shame,not glee.

now the second part of your comment directed towards me actually has a different tone and one i am not against,and i would assume most are not either.when we consider the unjust wars being fought and the number of innocents being slaughtered,are we really surprised at the rising suicide count in the military?
well..we shouldnt be.
warriors sent to war but stripped of honor can only lead to an ocean of guilt,shame and regret.
so i would agree with you that finding solace in christ in the form of forgiveness and absolution can be a great healing process.

but that is not what this video is about.
this video is about exploiting youth,extremely stressed to the point of breaking at boot camp.not some war ravaged outpost where the men are clinging to sanity.this is exploitation.

maybe you could have focused your comment content on those points on the latter part of your comment towards me.they were valid if not totally relevant to the video.there was no reason to take a swipe at hpqp.

hpqp is an atheist.
he/she makes no bones about that.
just like you are an evangelical and also make no bones.
this is not a bad but rather a very good thing for you both know where you stand.
and just because these military chaplains are evangelical does not mean they represent all evangelicals.
what they are doing in the name of christ is wrong and just because hpqp is an atheist does not mean he/she does not have the right to call them on their bullshit.
and you should not be defending them but rather siding with hpqp.

@dystopianfuturetoday

I think you go about prostylization the wrong way. I see you as kind of a digitized version of the guy who stands outside of bars with a megaphone and a sandwich board, passing judgement off on revelers that just don't care at best, and want to pick a fight with you at worst. Well intended, but not persuasive or well received.

I went about things the wrong way when I first arrived here, being somewhat of a neophyte to evangelism, which set the tone for the rest of my time here. Along the way, I've made some mistakes and said some things which further served to marginalize me, which the antitheists here have throughly capitalized on.

I was more hot blooded when I arrived, and cocky, being throughly schooled in all manner of philosophical argumentation, and having been *experienced* in the transcendent, I was more interested in dismantling arguments than showing the love of Christ. I regret that, but what's done is done. What's true is that God makes everything new.

My main failure was to take the bait of the innumerable insults that have been thrown my way. This was simply an immaturity in my faith, not really understanding what Jesus said about how I should react to them. He said to love that person, no matter how much they hate you. Pray for those who persecute you and despitefully use you. The insults are not as bothersome anymore. I'm more interested now in love than argument.

You write these large blocks of text filled with Bible verses, judgement and a good deal of fire and brimstone. FYI: Bible verses, judgement, fire and brimstone only work on people who already believe in and fear God, just as you probably have no fear of Xenu, Allah or Mitt "White Horse" Romney (google it - funny story)

I have a wide variety of conversations on the sift, many of them on historical, philosophical, and scientific topics. People ask me questions about nearly everything, and so I think it would be difficult to pigeonhole my comments this way. Certainly, I have witnessed the truth about Gods judgment, but this isn't my main focus. As far as fearing God goes, you're right, many do not, but their conscience is still witnessing against them.

I'll look up Mitt "white horse" Romney.

The Christians in my life that make me most sympathetic to Christianity are the ones who express their faith through actions, not words. I've only met a handful of these people in my life, but they've all made a positive impact on my life. These are the people who exude love, empathy, understanding and compassion. These are the people that say 'I love you' when you really need to hear 'I love you.' You feel it almost like an aura around them. And, in every case, I had to inquire about them to discover their faith - with none of that uncomfortable evangelizing that comes off more like used car sales pitch than deep expression of faith. And, unlike the used car sales pitch, when I did learn of their faith, I felt a genuine respect for it.

Certainly, Christians should be doing good works at every opportunity. Faith without works is dead. Scripture advises two approaches to reach people. It says some save with mercy, and others with fear. Some people are so hardhearted that the only way to pierce their armor is to make them realize that they will have to answer for their secret sins, the ones that people hide behind their masks of public purity. To let them know that they didn't actually get away with it, whatever it may be. That's kind of why it kind of amuses me when I hear someone say something like "If I saw God I would tell Him off", as if God doesn't have them dead to rights on a list of sins 5 miles long.

Others are like a fragile flower, which must be handled very carefully and gently. Ones who have been abused by the church, for instance. It is truly sad how common this actually is. Of course there are many situations inbetween these two approaches, but in general, it is some combination of the two, leaning towards one of them.

I appreciate what you're saying about your friends. Perhaps this is the way the Holy Spirit has called them to deal with you. They are most certainly praying for your salvation. Again, it depends on the situation. It depends on the kind of relationship, and how much time you have to invest in someone. It is usually expedient to share the gospel in most cases.

Ultimately, it is out of our hands. I can't save anyone; only the power of God can change someones heart. When someone is saved, it is a true miracle.

Of course you can't choose what you believe; what you believe chooses you, so none of these people have brought me any closer to God. But that's OK, because they've done something much more important, they've brought me closer to my fellow humans. They've shown me the power of empathy (not that I'm always the most empathetic person - I've a ways to go in that category) and how contagious just being a good person can really be.

You believe according to your experience, and how interested you are in what is actually true, versus what you appear to see. If you believe that you are generally right about everything, then you will never look beyond your preconceived notions. I only changed my mind about God because He showed me the spiritual reality. I could not logically believe in naturalistic materialism as being a legitimate description of reality after that.

It's wonderful that your friends have taught you something about life, especially concerning the love of God. What Jesus teaches is that every human being has intrinsic value and is worthy of respect and love. He teaches us to love unconditionally and sacrificially, disregarding our own preferences for the good of others. If you can move past all of the contentious issues that surround these topics, and look to the words of Jesus Christ, you will find a transcendent love superior to the wisdom of this world. He gives us a standard of behavior that is impossible for any human being to live up to (without His help). Jesus asks more of you than any other person, in this time or any other, ever will.

I'm not sure if this helps you, especially considering it's pretty hard to refute aggressive atheists if you don't talk a great deal about your faith. Maybe a better path would be to understand where these atheists are coming from and what you have in common. Mutual respect. I don't know.

It does help me, and I appreciate your advice. There is always a better path when there is an argument, although, there is simply no avoiding having to debate certain things, when certain misconceptions are presented as the truth about what Christianity is. Even though you may be predisposed to agree with religious criticism, you must notice the distortions that are bandied about in the atheist community about Christianity and religion in general. I hear the same ones, over and over and over again.

I mean you no offense by this comment, my religious spite phase has mostly passed. I'd like to see you have a little better time on the site and not be the subject of scorn. Many of the discussion you have with atheists seem like a waste of time for all parties, because it's just a clash of worldviews rather than an attempt to find common ground and make progress. Some of the atheists on this site can be very cruel. I don't really follow these long back and forth theological battles anymore, but if someone crosses that line and is cruel to you, I'd be happy to join in on your side. If that appeals to you, drop me a PM.

I'm glad to hear that you are no longer in the business of giving theists a hard time. There are certainly enough people working doubleshift on this that you can walk away with your head held high. Yes, I agree, common ground should be sought out as a matter of course, although it is not an exaggeration to say that convinced atheists and theists typically disagree on almost everything. It's also hard to approach this on a human level, being that this is the internet, and the medium is far inferior for interpersonal communication. It is good for certain kinds of communication, but when it comes to empathy for instance, much is lost.

In any case, I genuinely appreciate your offer. Thank you for your magnanimousness. I may take you up on it sometime. I might also ask you how you see humanity avoiding a dystopianfuturetomorrow.

@shinyblurry Some constructive criticism:

I think you go about prostylization the wrong way. I see you as kind of a digitized version of the guy who stands outside of bars with a megaphone and a sandwich board, passing judgement off on revelers that just don't care at best, and want to pick a fight with you at worst. Well intended, but not persuasive or well received.

You write these large blocks of text filled with Bible verses, judgement and a good deal of fire and brimstone. FYI: Bible verses, judgement, fire and brimstone only work on people who already believe in and fear God, just as you probably have no fear of Xenu, Allah or Mitt "White Horse" Romney (google it - funny story)

The Christians in my life that make me most sympathetic to Christianity are the ones who express their faith through actions, not words. I've only met a handful of these people in my life, but they've all made a positive impact on my life. These are the people who exude love, empathy, understanding and compassion. These are the people that say 'I love you' when you really need to hear 'I love you.' You feel it almost like an aura around them. And, in every case, I had to inquire about them to discover their faith - with none of that uncomfortable evangelizing that comes off more like used car sales pitch than deep expression of faith. And, unlike the used car sales pitch, when I did learn of their faith, I felt a genuine respect for it.

Of course you can't choose what you believe; what you believe chooses you, so none of these people have brought me any closer to God. But that's OK, because they've done something much more important, they've brought me closer to my fellow humans. They've shown me the power of empathy (not that I'm always the most empathetic person - I've a ways to go in that category) and how contagious just being a good person can really be.

I'm not sure if this helps you, especially considering it's pretty hard to refute aggressive atheists if you don't talk a great deal about your faith. Maybe a better path would be to understand where these atheists are coming from and what you have in common. Mutual respect. I don't know.

I mean you no offense by this comment, my religious spite phase has mostly passed. I'd like to see you have a little better time on the site and not be the subject of scorn. Many of the discussion you have with atheists seem like a waste of time for all parties, because it's just a clash of worldviews rather than an attempt to find common ground and make progress. Some of the atheists on this site can be very cruel. I don't really follow these long back and forth theological battles anymore, but if someone crosses that line and is cruel to you, I'd be happy to join in on your side. If that appeals to you, drop me a PM.

I don't understand what this thing is with Evangelical Christians, why are they such pussies? If I was crazy and thought being gay was wrong and a sin and my child came out to me as being gay I would stick to my guns out of spite. It would simply be easy for me to forget my own child and kick them out of the house, and never speak to them ever again.

Evangelicals need to grab some sack and learn to hate with more conviction!

>> ^messenger:
Thanks for your answers. As to the first, could you suggest then which variety of Christianity a prospective Christian might find the right support to really know Jesus? Evangelical? Mormonism? CofE?

You're welcome. Every denomination has its flaws and failings, some more than others. Neither is every church in every denomination the same. I am non denominational yet I attend an AOG church. I don't agree with all of their doctrine but the pastor teaches on solid biblical principles. I would recommend that a prospective Christian start to seek the Lord out through a private bible study. Based on that, they could move on to attending services in town and seeing what fits or where they are led, or a bible study with other Christians. I would recommend they avoid any church that teaches sacraments, cults like JW, 7th day Adventists, Mormonism, and the church of christ. Look for a church that teaches from the bible, and focuses on Jesus and sanctification.

>> ^messenger:
To the second, did you sincerely try to have a relationship with God through any other religion, or was your church the first one you really dedicated yourself to?

Yes, I did explore many of the various belief systems, philosophies, and religions of the world. I was seeking God at the time and He led me through most of them, giving me clues along the way, which eventually led me to Jesus Christ.

@shinyblurry

Thanks for your answers. As to the first, could you suggest then which variety of Christianity a prospective Christian might find the right support to really know Jesus? Evangelical? Mormonism? CofE?

To the second, did you sincerely try to have a relationship with God through any other religion, or was your church the first one you really dedicated yourself to?

The problem I have with the "buried million dollars" story is that it's complete propaganda, utter flatuent bullshit.

Religion promises you the million dollars. Sure, even more...
...but it then says you need to pay everything you possibly can to get the coordinates, but you will receive them only after you die.

No church, NOT A ONE, allows you to believe without paying. Period. Every last one says if you don't pay, to don't get to Heaven(tm). It's win-win for the religion, they get the cash wether or not there is an afterlife, as well as if the allegeded afterlife doesn't work as they say.

Religion is based on humans, and humans are devious, disgusting, and delinquent. Churches are just ancient pyramid scams, allowed to fester and spew their vile lies only through fear and threat.

From Evangelicals paying for whores, or pedophilic Catholic priests, every religion shows its true colours. Religion is disgusting, and preys on the week-willed and the ignorant.