The songs were catchy, and the animation was good, but I still think the plot was weak and holey.

Oh holey carp freakshow...

No they didn't. Almost everything you have said here is wrong. For instance, the earliest version of the New Testament that could be considered "canonized" consisted of ten of pauls epistles and a version of the gospel of Luke. It was only around 200 AD that the 27 books of the NT were decided to be the likely candidates for being wholly inspired works, which became agreed upon by the whole church by the middle of the 3rd century. There were 3 other books which were included in 397 as reading material, but they were not thought to be inspired. The catholic church included 11 more books in the 1500s, but no one else considered them inspired, including the jewish people who wrote them. They were finally taken out of bibles around the end of the 1800s, as you said.

These uninspired works were known as the apocrypha, and none of them ever belonged there in the first place. The fact is, the bible today matches what the early church had decided upon as inspired as early as 200 AD. Which brings us to the mormons, who claim that they have a special revelation from Jesus Christ, that He came and visted America and the indians, etc. The problem is, not excepting that there is no evidence for the claims it makes, or any precedent or prophecy that predicts it, that the claims of the book of mormon fundementally alters the truth of the gospels. It preaches a much different Jesus, as does Islam. Paul said this:

Galatians 1:8

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

Both the mormons and the muslims received their revelations from angels. Scripture also says this:

2 Corinthians 11:14

And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

Scripture rejects it, and that is why they are considered a cult and not Christian.


>> ^joedirt:
Wow are you the dumbest person spouting religious crap I've seen on this website.
from 100 AD until 1885 the Christians all had version of a Bible with 80 books in it. You are an ignorant person running around telling people what a Christian is and then you say the Bible is just the OT & NT. So clueless. Would it blow your mind to know that Islam and Mormonism all have the same Jesus in their sacred books? They both believe in the same Jesus, so by your definition that makes them Christians also.
If you consider Mormons a cult because they added a book, then guess what, you are also a follower of a cult by removing 14 books of the word of the Lord.
>> ^shinyblurry:
How can I trust YOUR holy book isn't lying to me?
Do you use a Baptist holey book? An Episcopalian wholly book?
Christians use the bible, which is the Old Testament and the New Testament in one volume. Mormons have added another book to that, which is the reason why it is a cult and not Christianity.

Regarding the founding fathers, you could also say they were white, therefore this should be a country for white people. Most founders of this country though religion was an abomination when it comes to matters of the state, and they feared ignorant people running around trying to declare nonsense like it should eb a nation of Chirstians.
>>>Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform. -- James Madison (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731).

Wow are you the dumbest person spouting religious crap I've seen on this website. from 100 AD until 1885 the Christians all had version of a Bible with 80 books in it!! You are an ignorant person running around telling people what a Christian is and then you say the Bible is just the OT & NT.

If you consider Mormons a cult because they added a book, then guess what, you are also a follower of a cult by removing 14 books of the word of the Lord.

So clueless. Would it blow your mind to know that Islam and Mormonism all have the same Jesus in their sacred books? They both believe in the same Jesus, so by your definition that makes them Christians also.


>> ^shinyblurry:

How can I trust YOUR holy book isn't lying to me?
Do you use a Baptist holey book? An Episcopalian wholly book?
Christians use the bible, which is the Old Testament and the New Testament in one volume. Mormons have added another book to that, which is the reason why it is a cult and not Christianity.




Regarding the founding fathers, you could also say they were white, therefore this should be a country for white people. Most founders of this country thought religion was an abomination when it comes to matters of the state, and they feared ignorant people running around trying to declare nonsense like it should be a nation of Chirstians.

>>>Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform. -- James Madison (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731).

How can I trust YOUR holy book isn't lying to me?

Do you use a Baptist holey book? An Episcopalian wholly book?

Christians use the bible, which is the Old Testament and the New Testament in one volume. Mormons have added another book to that, which is the reason why it is a cult and not Christianity. You can test the claims of Christianity by placing your faith in Jesus Christ, and asking Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
shit @shinyblurry
This is a big ball of yarn. Make sure to pace yourself.
You could bump the comment count up to 200 if you work your talking points right.
Just remember, keep your retorts short. ;]
Show mercy. If you condemn all of our souls to hell too quickly, there won't be anyone to argue with and judge as a sinner later in the thread.
Okay, here's one for you to practice on:
Hey Shiny, since Mormon's aren't TRUE christians and the holy book of mormon is lying about the one TRUE god, Yahweh..
How can I trust YOUR holy book isn't lying to me?
Do you use a Baptist holey book? An Episcopalian wholly book?
Remember - KIQ: keep it quick.
- Save the Big Damnation Guns for later responses
- Stay on topic but also vaguely out in left field. It helps draw out the weak points of our ignorant, sinful opinions

shit @shinyblurry

This is a big ball of yarn. Make sure to pace yourself.
You could bump the comment count up to 200 if you work your talking points right.

Just remember, keep your retorts short. ;]

Show mercy. If you condemn all of our souls to hell too quickly, there won't be anyone to argue with and judge as a sinner later in the thread.


Okay, here's one for you to practice on:

Hey Shiny, since Mormon's aren't TRUE christians and the holy book of mormon is lying about the one TRUE god, Yahweh..

How can I trust YOUR holy book isn't lying to me?

Do you use a Baptist holey book? An Episcopalian wholly book?

Remember - KIQ: keep it quick.
- Save the Big Damnation Guns for later responses
- Stay on topic but also vaguely out in left field. It helps draw out the weak points of our ignorant, sinful opinions

holey fuck.

Wait a second! I just had an epiphany!
The term "troll" comes from the verb to "troll"... like "I went out trolling for fish but all I caught was this plastic bag."
At some point, someone said "holey crap! I just had an epiphany! We can call people who troll on online forums 'trolls' and it will be hilarious!"

..sorry, I'm kinda slow sometimes. I used to think that "to make ends meet" was "to make end's meat"... as in to make enough money to buy the low quality meat at the end of the animal.

Holey pants pockets... wtf are people smoking???

I don't agree with craig on many of his views, so why should I have to defend him? I'll speak to my own views, thanks. Although I appreciate craigs philosophical arguments, I don't particularly agree with his theology. I'm not going to defend the views of every theist in the world. If you want to play guilt by association, I've got plenty to work with..we can start with stalin and pol pot if you like.


>> ^hpqp:
ah @<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since January 21st, 2011" href="http://religion.videosift.com/member/shinyblurry">shinyblurry , always ready to rip a new one for whoever dares criticize your holey book (even when that person is a child who seems to have more knowledge thereof than yourself... or maybe especially because of it?)
I suggest you take a page from her book and consult the skeptic's annotated Bible (as she obviously has).
While you're defending the atrocities condoned/ordered by Yahweh, perhaps you might like to tell us what you think of the justification your fellow apologist W. L. Craig offers (for God's orders to kill men, women and children) in the link below?
>> ^hpqp:
William Lane Craig is a KING of the sophisticated theology that people like Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and so on just don't get. My favourite example so far is how he explains the morality behind the brutal massacres of children in the Bible, and argues ever so convincingly that the true victims are the poor murderers, who must have been simply traumatised doing God's bidding.
Read and learn, amoral heathens!

ah @shinyblurry , always ready to rip a new one for whoever dares criticize your holey book (even when that person is a child who seems to have more knowledge thereof than yourself... or maybe especially because of it?)

I suggest you take a page from her book and consult the skeptic's annotated Bible (as she obviously has).

While you're defending the atrocities condoned/ordered by Yahweh, perhaps you might like to tell us what you think of the justification your fellow apologist W. L. Craig offers (for God's orders to kill men, women and children) in the link below?

>> ^hpqp:

William Lane Craig is a KING of the sophisticated theology that people like Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and so on just don't get. My favourite example so far is how he explains the morality behind the brutal massacres of children in the Bible, and argues ever so convincingly that the true victims are the poor murderers, who must have been simply traumatised doing God's bidding.
Read and learn, amoral heathens!

>> ^handmethekeysyou:

Why would you find yourself with a truckload of pigeons?
And if you had worked so hard at building such an impressive pigeon collection, why would you squander it?


Homing Pigeon Racing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeon_racing

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since February 23rd, 2007" href="http://videosift.com/member/sirex">sirex
Points to consider:
Accepting money in exchange for sexual favors. That makes you a whore.
Who the hell randomly chooses their sexual partners? Enjoy STDs much?
If anything, it makes sense that she'd make her selections from the same circle of candidates, for multiple reasons:
She obviously like athletic guys. It's much easier to obtain vital information. She'd have plenty of opportunities to court the ones she liked.
You're just calling her a whore cause our culture allows for it.


Whore is a bit slangish for this, however, I will agree with you that it is inappropriate as long as you never have exchanged a word to slightly mean something it does not really mean. For example, LawDee is a dick. While I do in fact have a penis, I am not fully a dick, and therefore you cannot call my whole person a dick. That goes for ass-holey, dumbass, gaytard, loser (What did I lose? And where did I put it?)

This rule must also apply to words that have a dual meaning---unless you correctly note what intended meaning you implied. "The bear was in the buff." Wait, did you mean "the naked was in the muscled." Or, "The animal was naked."


Of course I am being facious. But you must remember, you are your own culture. Sure, you can try to change it, but slangism is what we do. And sports teams is what she does.

The only thing I do not like---the double standard. If men are "whores" then call them that. I do.

I love Cheeses...Holey Cheeses...big-time-styley!

Horrible case indeed... truly warped mind to ever think this was how to handle bad grades.

However I have to take issue with UsesProzac...

My family was a foster family for many years and took in many, many kids, some for short term (days/weeks), others for years at a time. (young kids of less than school and early school age) We gave them a stable environment and care and support when their parents were holey incapable of doing so.

Drug addicts, abusive partners, abusive mothers etc. etc. We got kids who were horrendously shell shocked from what they had come from. After some time with my family (my parents really, I was young myself) they came out of their shells and started being happy and 'normal' in that they could enjoy playing again.

While I do agree that there are absolutely cases of foster families doing bad things, I think you'll find the majority are wonderful people who have nothing but the kid's best interest at heart.
>> ^UsesProzac:
Foster care is horrible. I know too many people with horror stories of rape and abuse to ever agree with a child being in a foster home