A real Christian doesn't take scripture painfully out of context..God tested Abraham..it's not a call for believers to sacrifice their children. If you love Jesus, you wouldn't trash the word of God which He confirmed as truth. Many Christians, like this kid, are guilty of apostacy which is making up your own gospel. This kid is not only out of line, he is sowing discord in the body which is the work of the devil.

John 14:23-24

Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

>> ^marinara:
i love jesus and i love the kid (in the video)'s blog.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/21/my-take-bible-condemns-a-lot-so-why-focus-on-homosexuality/
remember when god was asking you to sacrifice your children by burning them?
"Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." Genesis 22:1-18
If anyone asks me to be a Real christian, I'll be wanting to see them burn their sons.

I said numbers don't mean anything, but if you want to make a big deal out of my comment, fine..God gives everyone a fair chance..anyone who goes to hell is just someone who refused to turn from their evil..it's not like anyone is "stuck" somewhere, as if God couldn't reach them..God isn't limited..so what is incomprehensible to you is possible for Him..Here is a primary example of God reaching someone who otherwise wouldn't know about HIm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvvClFSMIzA

>> ^mizila:
The true God would have the number one, I'm sorry, "#1" religion? Seriously? Even if that religion is only two-sevenths of the world's population. Saving two people out of every seven is good enough for God I guess. And then you drag the half of the world you believe are doomed for eternity because they pray to the wrong Magic Sky Person into it and use them to suggest, "Hey they'll all burn in Hell because they picked the wrong God but at least they get the idea, unlike you morons." Of course, Islam and Judaism also believe in the Abrahemic God, so there's a billion and a half people who do believe in your God, but get to go to Hell because they're doing it wrong.
But no, really, your translations of old books and imaginary friend are way better than critical thinking. Three cheers for God!
The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!
The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!!
The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!!!
>> ^shinyblurry:
Not that numbers prove anything, but Christianity is the worlds biggest religion. I would think that the true God would have the #1 religion. Don't forget that 4/5's of the world disagrees with your conclusion that there isn't a God in the first place.

The true God would have the number one, I'm sorry, "#1" religion? Seriously? Even if that religion is only two-sevenths of the world's population. Saving two people out of every seven is good enough for God I guess. And then you drag the half of the world you believe are doomed for eternity because they pray to the wrong Magic Sky Person into it and use them to suggest, "Hey they'll all burn in Hell because they picked the wrong God but at least they get the idea, unlike you morons." Of course, Islam and Judaism also believe in the Abrahemic God, so there's a billion and a half people who do believe in your God, but get to go to Hell because they're doing it wrong.

But no, really, your translations of old books and imaginary friend are way better than critical thinking. Three cheers for God!

The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!
The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!!
The Abrahamic God is #1 when worshipped in a (proper) Christian way!!!


>> ^shinyblurry:
Not that numbers prove anything, but Christianity is the worlds biggest religion. I would think that the true God would have the #1 religion. Don't forget that 4/5's of the world disagrees with your conclusion that there isn't a God in the first place.

^concerning the above comments, I will concede two points: first, this is obviously an angry rant that is not to be taken too seriously (cf. the comic it is transcribed from). Second, the author clearly has Christianity (and the Abrahamic monotheisms in general) in mind when using the term "religion", causing its use to partially exclude certain religions.

That being said, the sentiment of contempt and disrespect for people's refusal to use their "god-given" brains in the domains of ethics, superstitious beliefs, etc., is perfectly understandable, and does not mean that the bearer of such sentiment has no empathy for the human being, even when considering said human being an idiot.

An extreme example: I have nothing but contempt and not one iota of respect for the WBC gang, and yet I would rush to their guru's aid (as probably any one of you commentators would) if he were to be hit by a truck. Does that mean I think he's not stupid? Or suddenly have respect for him? NO. Only basic human empathy.

As for the Weinberg quote, yes, I am aware of the Stanford and Milgram experiments, which show the effect of authority on human behaviour. Weinberg's quote implicitly integrates those experiments; indeed, what greater and more unquestionable authority is there than God(s)? How many disgusting, unethical and barbaric actions and wordlviews are continually sanctioned by religious authority (and the weight of the sheeple's adherence thereto), that no self-respecting ethical and empathetic person would otherwise accept?

As for Communism, it is nothing but a state religion, with the Party replacing God. I won't bother addressing the moronic argument of "Hitler, Mao, Stalin, etc...", which has been thoroughly debunked by many speakers far more eloquent than myself (e.g. Hitchens).

Finally, @quantumushroom, your answer about atheists being delusional not only makes no sense (unless you're teetering into solipsism), but quoting the Bible does not help your case in the least. Benjamin Frankin's comment seems to be a cynical criticism of the masses' stupidity and immorality, not a sanction of religion's merit.

"In the affairs of the world, men are saved, not by faith, but by the want of it." Benjamin Franklin

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin

I think you're looking for the word "empathy" when writing REspect.

>>> That's correct. REspect is the treatment resulting from empathy.

1) Strawman attack. Nothing in the letter suggests what you're accusing it of.

>>> The Bozo in question wrote, "I have nothing but contempt for you (the religious)." Therefore I would not expect REspect or empathy from such an individual. He's set himself up as an enemy, needlessly, I might add. Look at all the angry responses here. Probably what he was after.

2) Atheists are smarter than religious people within the domains mentioned.

>>> What "domains" are we considering? Science? Famous Scientists Who Believed in God There are plenty of dumb atheists as well as dumb religious people. There are also atheists who have not a whit of curiosity about the universe.

3)You have two points here that have nothing to do one with the other.

They're close cousins.

First: most religions (including the worst of the lot, i.e. the Abrahamic monotheisms) do exclude all other religions.

Bozo said "you realize all the OTHER religions are wrong" in blanket condemnation.

The farther one moves from this exclusivity, the closer one gets to a religion being a philosophy (e.g. Buddhism, Jainism), or woo (e.g. New Age).

You forget Hinduism, a dynamic, evolving faith older then Christianity, with billions of gods. It accepts other paths as legit. But even as Hinduism is weighted down with a caste system, Christianity has broken barriers around the world across all nations and races and even within itself.

Second: “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.” ~ Steven Weinberg

Weinberg needs to read up on communism, a much more potent enemy of human dignity and worth. Communist countries are run by a--holes who believe they are the only true gods. Religion can be abusive, insulting and dehumanizing in the wrong hands, just like politics and language. However, there is no atheist tradition declaring 'All life has value.' Einstein once said 'Either everything is a miracle or nothing is.' The lack of sanctity endemic to atheism places it on the side of nothing being miraculous. It doesn't mean atheists are bad people, it means they have no reference outside of their own feelings, which leads us to...

4) Care to explain how atheism is delusional?

I said the atheist is delusional, not atheism, and I'm not referring to what atheists think of deities at all.

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it? This means you and I can rationalize anything at any time. We lie to ourselves ALL THE TIME to preserve our own egos and pride, with a subconscious dominantly seeking pleasure or avoiding pain. A single human is not even a unified consciousness but a collection of competing desires and savage impulses. It's a miracle in itself that anyone ever stops to look outside of themselves.

The atheist has as much right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as anyone else, but I'm still siding with Ben Franklin: If Men are so wicked as we now see them with Religion what would they be if without it?

@quantumushroom

I think you're looking for the word "empathy" when writing REspect.

1) Strawman attack. Nothing in the letter suggests what you're accusing it of.

2) No, replace "religion" with "white supremacy" (or any other form of stupid ideology) and the conclusions remain the same, without the speaker being an idiot. Atheists are smarter than religious people within the domains mentioned.

3)You have two points here that have nothing to do one with the other. First: most religions (including the worst of the lot, i.e. the Abrahamic monotheisms) do exclude all other religions. The farther one moves from this exclusivity, the closer one gets to a religion being a philosophy (e.g. Buddhism, Jainism), or woo (e.g. New Age).
Second: “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.” ~ Steven Weinberg

4) Care to explain how atheism is delusional?

Now you're just being disingenuous. I'm not keep it a secret, I've offered to share it with you. Your attitude now and attempt to goad me with an emotional, and even biblical appeal (love when atheists do that) is exactly the reason I am not posting it in a public forum. Since you're getting all hot and heavy about it now, here are two good reasons why not:

Matthew 7:6

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

Luke 16:19-31

19There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

26And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead





>> ^TheSluiceGate:
>> ^shinyblurry:
It's because it is sacred to me and I don't wish to expose those experiences to scorn and ridicule, which will inevitably follow.

What do you mean by "it is sacred to me"? And why does this put your personal proof of god's existence above public discussion?
Surely it's immoral to hold your proof of god's existence a secret if our conversion to theism is so important? You'd let us all die godless to avoid a little "scorn and ridcule" on an internet massageboard that hosts funny videos of cats?
The bible speaks of another man who held is tongue in relation to his personal knowledge of christ...
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
"But Peter said, "Man, I do not know what you are talking about." And immediately, while he was still speaking, a cock crowed. And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had told him, "Before a cock crows today, you will deny Me three times." And he went out and wept bitterly." (Luke 22:60-62 NASB)
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------

The devil could convince someone to kill their own mother and wear their head like a hat. His ways are supernatural, and he has every advantage. He is the ruler of this world and has a supernatural dominion. It's easy for him though, because there simply isn't any limit to human depravity. The bible says no one knows how wicked the human heart really is, but the devil probably has an idea.

People think that the devils main appearance is that of a red faced grotesque..but that isn't the truth. He can appear however he wants. He can even make himself appear as an angel of light. He could have been whispering all of this into her ear appearing as a messanger of God, and she would have believed every word. "The great tribulation is coming..it's time to go..you need to get your daughters to heaven now so they dont suffer any pain"

I've seen it in action..I have dealt with people possessed by evil spirits who basically told me that..they hate humans to the utmost, and that they spend every hour of every day creating elaborate fantasies (they even compare their "business" to disneyland) which are designed to mislead humans away from God so they can ruin Creation as much as possible before they are cast out forever. As a final middle finger to God, basically.

Everyone is a target, but if you don't believe in God, he will probably leave you alone. You're right where he wants you to be.





>> ^Opus_Moderandi:
>> ^shinyblurry:
<
Explain which? Why this lady went nuts? Probably demonic influence.

What "demonic influence" would make killing your children the better thing to do? I don't understand what the devil (or anyone else) could say that would make cutting up your own children the right thing to do. (Also see: Abraham)

>> ^shinyblurry:
<
Explain which? Why this lady went nuts? Probably demonic influence.


What "demonic influence" would make killing your children the better thing to do? I don't understand what the devil (or anyone else) could say that would make cutting up your own children the right thing to do. (Also see: Abraham)

Okay forgiven but what I am getting at is what Paul preached. Which is saved in Christ and Christ resurrected..I don't know what socio-economic conditions have to do with being saved but i have done my research. I used to live with a pagan so I was exposed to the occult and pagan religions. I also had a background in the abrahamic religions, hinduism as well as buddhism, zen buddhism, kundalini yoga, i mean really esoteric stuff..babylonian, enki and enlil kind of stuff..and also i was around people who welcomed evil spirits in their lives..and they would meet these spirits in the astral plane by engaging in astral travel..i knew someone who could do it at will..its all very interesting seeming but it is straight from hell..it's all for evil, this is how people get misled in the pagan world, some spirit makes them think they are spiritually powerful so they become arrogant and think they are above God. Which is what the devil thinks, coincidently. God has never disappointed me or let me down..I trust in Him and His holy name. That's my point. I don't know how you could really define my views..according to my experience I was elected by God..God is entirely real to me, if I said He wasn't I would be a liar. So I witness to that and to the gospel as the word of the living God. What would you call that? And no I am not a pretriest..Christ has yet to come again..

>> ^enoch:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since January 21st, 2011" href="http://videosift.com/member/shinyblurry">shinyblurry
i just read your recent post.
well thought out and i agree with the points pertaining to the differences between jesus and the other myriad of resurrection deities.
i dont know why that post didnt appear when i first came to this thread.
maybe it was during the time of me writing my previous post.please forgive.
that was very well done.
that is precisely the difference and also how i too..resolved that issue.
i thank you for your answer.

I disagree. I think you are confusing faith with deduction and inference, which is always incredibly annoying when people talk about how atheists require faith. No, all we require is evidence!

We can infer from available evidence, for instance, that the Big Bang happened, or that dark matter is likely to exist because of other observations and EVIDENCE that it does. The math involved in the physical universe doesn't quite work out without it, despite the fact that we cannot see it. This is, of course, a theory (an actual, scientific type theory), but a theory that makes sense based on the best, current, available EVIDENCE. Similarly, we once inferred that God existed because we did not have the knowledge, nor the tools with which to examine our world with anywhere close to the fidelity that we are able to today, and now we are able to throw out the God hypothesis in almost every discipline of study.

Faith, conversely, requires that you not have evidence and just believe in something without proof, or upon someone's word. Perhaps I did not take enough salt with your statement, but faith is certainly not the evidence of anything, let alone "the unseen". Evidence of the unseen, would still be evidence from which we can deduce a conclusion. If you have evidence, you are no longer faithful, you are simply informed. And as of now, there is no actual evidence outside of anecdotes like this video, the Bible itself, and emotional appeals - which are easily dismissed as not credible - for a deity.

The problem with God is that He's just plugged into areas where we don't know things, and people take it upon faith that He's real, even in areas where there is more than enough real, tangible evidence to contradict a need for a deity. That is why secularists get so irritated at young Earth creationists and the like, where a preponderance of repeatable, testable, falsifiable, and verifiable evidence shows how enormously wrong they are, yet they refuse to believe the evidence itself, because it goes against their faith in what they believe to be true. A person might have all of the intellect and powers of critical thinking in the world, but when someone takes something on faith, they abandon those powers to plug in a simple answer for whatever their personal reasons.

I don't know your story, or how you feel you've rationalized yourself into belief, whether it be through some sort of Pascal's Wager thing, or what, and I certainly don't think you are an "ignorant, bumbling Neanderthal" but to accept any of an infinite number of god possibilities, let alone the specific Abrahamic God requires faith, and an absence of logic in the absence of real evidence.

Sorry, I went on a rant there...>> ^smooman:


while that may be true, they are not mutually exclusive.
faith is the evidence of things unseen (i know thats gonna mean zilch to you so take that with a grain of salt) and i very seriously doubt you could convincingly question the critical thinking skills of persons such as CS Lewis
i dont think atheists (or non christians for that matter) are godless sinners, devoid of any morality, any more than i would hope that you not think me an ignorant, bumbling, neanderthal because im religious
we have different religious views, however this does not make either of us smarter, more critical, or better than the other because of that fact

bill whittle=revisionist and apologist.
george bush may 1st 2003 on the deck of the abraham lincon:
"major combat operations in iraq have ended.in the battle of iraq,the united states and her allies ...have prevailed".
whittle is correct that bush never once says "mission accomplished".do i need to point out the semantics here?

then he goes on to conflate that somehow iraqis ability to vote (while ignoring the massive amount of data concerning fraud,intimidation and outright scandal) is the very thing which inspired epypt,syria and jordan to rise up against their theocratic,oppressive regimes.
this is patently false and the reasons are well documented and not one of them is iraqs ability to vote.

waterboarding was the reason we got positive intell on bin laden?
ok now he is just making stuff up to fit his own premise.there is NO documentation to back that statement up.in fact the intelligence has revealed the exact opposite.

article 3 of the geneva convention CLEARLY states that waterboarding IS considered torture.case closed.end of discussion.

this video is so chock full of disinformation that my head may explode due to the sheer volume.
bill whittles bush-love is well known.
the only satisfaction i get from this video is the fact that bin laden was assasinated under obama and must keep this tool up at night crying into his pillow.
poor poor whittle.

>> ^spaceisbig:

I don't really want to get into this discussion but it bothers me when people bring up the party of historical figures. In the time of Andrew Jackson I do believe the Whig party was actually still around. Yes Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, but his ideology reads as a Democrat's would nowadays. Also, many people consider the time period of Civil Rights in the U.S. a time when the political ideology of the two parties actually swapped.


Too late! You're in the discussion now, pal! No backing out! (<-- winkey smiley face means I kid)

I agree that a lot of what defined Lincoln is what also currently defines a modern Democratic politician. But mostly in terms of a large, centralized federal government versus a union of states with their own individual and self-defined rights. He did, however, suspend habeas corpus and locked up US citizens without trial for sedition. Mainly people in the free press he deemed 'Confederate Sympathizers'.

Right, your logic is undeniable, if you want sound money, no central bank, or state works projects, your are a racist. Glad we cleared up your position.
>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
You mean the man responsible for one of the larger acts of treachery towards the natives, of which helped him win the war of 1812, was a democrat? Wait, Abraham Lincoln was a republican? It is hard for me to recite my trite narrative with this historical evidence in my path!

Andrew Jackson's platform reads like a Tea Party masturbation fantasy. He eliminated the national debt, he eliminated the Federal Reserve of his time, he wanted to eliminate paper money (gold and silver coins only, please!), and thought a federal highway or rail system was unconstitutional. Hey, wasn't the Confederacy a project embarked on by a bunch of Southern Democrats who believed in states' rights? Totally different from Southern Republicans advocating so many of the same things today, because, like, Abraham Lincoln and stuff.
That sounds like solid historical evidence to me. Evidence that supports my hypothesis, though.
It must be hard indeed for you to recite your trite narrative with all that historical evidence in your path!

I don't really want to get into this discussion but it bothers me when people bring up the party of historical figures. In the time of Andrew Jackson I do believe the Whig party was actually still around. Yes Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, but his ideology reads as a Democrat's would nowadays. Also, many people consider the time period of Civil Rights in the U.S. a time when the political ideology of the two parties actually swapped.