In light of all the recent protests, be it London or BART or elsewhere, I'd like to say this:
The revolution will not be televised... it will be tweeted, blogged, vlogged, liked, with a +1 cherry on top.

*promote

BART Disables Cell Service To Disrupt Protests

So now San Francisco is cutting cell phone service. Same thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant#BART.27s_response

Your video, Bart Simpson Walks In On Homer's Stomach Eating Pizza, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^BoneRemake:
I am not sure... Either @gwiz665 is happy there is more Simpsons videos... Or annoyed because of the competition.

Second, I am taking out Gwiz singlehandedly...who's with me?


That head of his needs to be shrunk, I am with ya !

My two cents:

The only reason that I felt that the latest video is snuff, is that you can hear the cop dying. Just hearing his final gasps and his shrieks of terror were (I think) almost more disturbing than if I had watched him die on camera.

I think the videos of cops shooting innocent people have some more value because it's not something that's supposed to happen. This is America, people kill cops. That's precisely why every single cop carries a gun. I'm not saying that's what's supposed to happen, but I think it's more disturbing when cops shoot someone who a significant portion of the population believe to be innocent based on the video.

I don't want to see innocent people getting shot, just like I don't want to see cops getting shot. But especially in the case of the shooting that took place in the "BART" station, convicting a cop in the murder of a civilian is always harder than convicting a civilian in the murder of a cop. It involves complicated legal issues and unfortunately seems to be based on public sentiment.

I also felt that the BART shooting was important news because not one news network reported the event until days after. If someone shoots a cop, the news is all over it, but unless you lived in Oakland, or were watching youtube the day that shooting took place, you wouldn't likely have known about it until that cop had already escaped to Nevada.

I know your discussion here is more about guidelines. I just wanted to share.

>> ^DerHasisttot:

When he pronounced "Friedrich Nietzsche" correctly, I immediately thought of the scene in the Simpsons when Sideshow Bob reveals his "Die Bart, die" - tattoo.


No one who speaks German could be evil!

When he pronounced "Friedrich Nietzsche" correctly, I immediately thought of the scene in the Simpsons when Sideshow Bob reveals his "Die Bart, die" - tattoo.

What's always amazing to me is that someone could look at a HUGE page full of evidence against..pick out one thing that supports their view, and then discard everything else. Anyway, this doesn't help your case at all, it actually continues to disprove your theory that bible is unreliable. I will concede that some translations of the bible contain errors, or "emotional baggage." But again, it's really not a problem because we have the originals. You can find translations of the originals online or in book stores. So, maybe *you* should read the bible, especially before you critisize it.

As far as your contention about atheists knowing more about religion than the average Christian, in general, I might concede that. You have to remember there are 2 billion Christians in the world..33 percent of the population. That's a big pool to average from To me it just proves how obsessed atheists are over something that they all claim to not care one lick about.

It's amusing to me that there are atheists out there who think more about God than Christians do. However, in general is where the comparison ends. I've seen no atheists, and I mean zero, who have a comprehensive understanding of what's in the bible, how it all interrelates, could construct a theological argument or debunk it on theological terms, or apply its meaning. This includes the famous atheists debators. Most of them are extremely poor scholars. They have their incindiary talking points which lure in the easily misled, but other than hot air, there isn't much else.

>> ^JiggaJonson:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since January 21st, 2011" href="http://videosift.com/member/shinyblurry">shinyblurry from the link you posted to me "At the same time, Ehrman implicitly raises a valid issue. A glance at virtually any English Bible today reveals that the longer ending of Mark and the pericope adulterae are to be found in their usual places. Thus, not only do the KJV and NKJV have these passages (as would be expected), but so do the ASV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, TNIV, NASB, ESV, TEV, NAB, NJB, and NET. Yet the scholars who produced these translations, by and large, do not subscribe to the authenticity of such texts. The reasons are simple enough: they don’t show up in the oldest and best manuscripts and their internal evidence is decidedly against authenticity. Why then are they still in these Bibles?"
Your author goes on to explain that the only reason some passages are kept in the bible at all is not because they are authentic but because of emotional baggage that people have attached to said passages. He even flatly says: "This is not to say that everything Ehrman has written in this book is of that ilk. But these three passages are."
This is HARDLY a "debunk"ing as you suggest. If anything it's a re-affirmation of what I stated before and further proof that the bible is a very fallible text.
I think the real problem here is maybe you aren't even reading the bible/your own sources as I suggested earlier with this link: http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/09/28/survey-atheists-know-more-about-religion-than-believers/

@shinyblurry from the link you posted to me "At the same time, Ehrman implicitly raises a valid issue. A glance at virtually any English Bible today reveals that the longer ending of Mark and the pericope adulterae are to be found in their usual places. Thus, not only do the KJV and NKJV have these passages (as would be expected), but so do the ASV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, TNIV, NASB, ESV, TEV, NAB, NJB, and NET. Yet the scholars who produced these translations, by and large, do not subscribe to the authenticity of such texts. The reasons are simple enough: they don’t show up in the oldest and best manuscripts and their internal evidence is decidedly against authenticity. Why then are they still in these Bibles?"

Your author goes on to explain that the only reason some passages are kept in the bible at all is not because they are authentic but because of emotional baggage that people have attached to said passages. He even flatly says: "This is not to say that everything Ehrman has written in this book is of that ilk. But these three passages are."

This is HARDLY a "debunk"ing as you suggest. If anything it's a re-affirmation of what I stated before and further proof that the bible is a very fallible text.

I think the real problem here is maybe you aren't even reading the bible/your own sources as I suggested earlier with this link: http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/09/28/survey-atheists-know-more-about-religion-than-believers/

How do you know your god is the right one if you rely on faith?

Because He responds by direct revelation. He lets you know He exists, and who He is. It's not however like He is always standing in front of you..you have to faith day by day..a bit like a family member who went off to another country that has no lines of communication. You have no way of seeing them but you have faith that they're still alive and having fun on planet Earth.

Your analogy suggests that the evidence for god is all around us, what evidence, specifically, are you pointing to?

Romans 1:20 says this

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Personally, I can attest to this truth. I had seen Gods attributes, His power and divine love namely, all my life..I had the puzzle pieces but not the picture. It's only when I found out God is real that they all fell into place.

How do you know you're pleasing god so that the evidence will be forthcoming as you suggest?

The main sign of living a life pleasing to God is the transformative power of the Holy Spirit. When you live without sinning, you are spiritually purified. In Christ, you are a new creation. You die to your carnal, worldly self and are reborn in the Spirit. The evidence is in your own behavior, internally and externally. Myself, I have been utterly transformed..still have a long way to go obviously, but I am quantifiably better than I was before, in every way. He lets you know in other ways but this is the main evidence.

How do you know what is the will of god if the very nature of god and his decisions is mysterious and beyond our understanding?

Because He stoops to our level and lets us know personally.

The bible is flawed horrendously before you go to that easy answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cK3Ry_icJo&playnext=1&list=PL80294485C9139857

debunked: http://bible.org/article/gospel-according-bart

The pest bart of this is that WESTY YOU postid it!

Thank you!

In reply to this comment by Deano:
*promote