>> ^dgandhi:
We have recently been on a bad "fascist" cops binge.

true, but only only because that first one, was so appallingly blatant.
so, that naturally went through the roof.

>> ^thesnipe:
Let's not forget the ZPR fad that's still huge now!

for me, those got meh pretty fast.
i know. heresy, right? dunno'. just, after the first few, they got stale.

>> ^rottenseed:
Today I've seen a little microfad of marijuana related sifts.

really? i hadn't noticed...

>> ^Thylan:
I request a TEDTalk fad.

wewt. big things are afoot, at the circle k, ted.

"The Catholic church gets bashed on a lot and I'm never sure why."


The vatican staying silent about the holocaust during WWII,

Still teaching even today that HIV can pass through condoms in AIDS stricken Africa,

Covering up child abuse allegations, for example that of Father John Geoghan, accused of sexually molesting over 100 boys in the Archdiocese of Boston,

The persecution of Galileo, the inventor of the telescope,

The infamous brutal and violating interrogations directed at the suppresion of heresy,

In fact hundreds of years of years of persection, deceit, lies and social control; much of which can be levelled at any religion in the world. Take your pick.

The vatican's position on evolution does not explicity say that evolution is the most likely creation theory, only that "faith and scientific findings regarding the evolution of man's material body are not in conflict, though man is regarded as a 'special creation', and that the existence of God is required to explain the spiritual component of man's origins."

This is always worth saying: Science is a METHOD, not a position.

I will admit a heresy: I think Kate Bush is a genius and I wish more people would cover her work because I can't stand the sound of her voice. I used to work somewhere where either kate bush or peter gabriel (his solo work only) were on the sound system constantly and I had to grit my teeth during kate's disks. I love the songs, I just don't like to be sung to by chipmunks.

As promised, here is the transcript, to the best of my transcripting abilities. I've shrunk the text size to keep it from being any more gigantic than it has to be. Copy and paste it if it's too small to read.

It's interesting when people speak of areas of evolution for which we have no explanations. All the fundamental concepts of the evolutionary process are understood at least at some fundamental level. Now, are there gaps? Not gaps in the sense that people think. People, now, speak of gaps, for example, in the record. You know... we don't have fossils from before the Camrbian Explosion, but so what? The record is complete; it's not complete by means of fossils. You see in Darwin's time the only way to reconstruct evolutionary history was by studying fossils, by comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, biogeography. It was 150 years ago; science has advanced tremendously. We can now reconstruct evolutionary history with much more powerful methods; the methods of molecular biology, by looking at DNA, by looking at proteins and with these methods we have reconstructed the record completely. We can go back to the organisms, a group of organisms, called LUCA ('L' 'U' 'C' 'A') for the Last Universal Common Ancestor. We can find the common ancestors of all animals, common ancestors of all plants, of all fungi, of all bacteria. We can find the... we can reconstruct the histories of the common ancestors of plants and animals and fungi and bacteria going back to the very beginning. We don't know all the details, because who wants to know all the details? If you are studying the Rocky Mountains, you don't want to have, necessarily, a map where every st.. every tree and every rock is there. If you want to know the details of a particular area within the Rocky Mountains you can go there and study as much as you want and find every little rock, every little leaf, every little tree, every little plant there. The same with evolution. We can now look at any area of evolutionary history and we can understand it with as much detail as we wish. The methods of molecular biology are so powerful, are so quantitative, and also so redundant, we can study anything we want with as much detail as we want. Now there another way in which the people who propose.. propound intelligent design speak of as... about, um... you know, gaps in the record. How did the eye come about? Well we understand now at the genetic level [unintelligible], we actually understand that at almost every other level, they make the unwarranted and erroneous assumption that if something is complex, and every part depends on every other part, that it could not have come about by evolution. It's like a watch. It does not help to have one little piece, or the other piece, or the other piece. You have to have them all or you don't have a watch, but that's not so with organisms. So we have in mollusks today, these are snails and clams and so.. and squids, we have an example.. an example of eyes which go from the simplest to the most complex. I'm going to speak about eyes because the eye is one example they use, unless you have everything, unless you have the cornea and the lense and the retina and the... and the optical nerve, having one part of this alone doesn't help. Well in mollusks, and in some mollusks called limpids, they have something that you can call eyes. They're just a few pigmented cells linked to single neurons, nerve cells, which carry the information to the primitive brain of these creatures. Just a few pigmented cells. Then we have mollusks which have more pigmented cells and some of them forming a kind of cup which allows to detect the direction of the light. Then we have what are called pinhole eyes which are this cup, still a little more extreme and a little more sensitive-to-light cells, and more nerve cells, and then you have... we have animals, still speaking about mollusks, which have just simple refractive lense as well as the sensitive... light-sensitive cells which eventually in advanced organisms they advanced to the... gave rise to the retina. And you go all the way to octopus and squids which have an eye very much like ours: has cornea, has a lense, has a retina, has muscles to move it, has a.. a optic nerve. Curiously enough the eye of the squid is better than ours in that we have a substantial imperfection that they don't have. For historical reason, that's for evolutionary history of how the human eye came about, the neurons that register the signals in the retina are inside the eye. So for those signals to go to the brain, these nerve cells get collected in the optic nerve, the optic nerve has to cross the retina so we have a blind spot. Now squids and octopuses have the nerve cells connected to what is the retina from the outside. So they collect into what is the optic nerve and they send the signal to the brain without having any blindspot. Well the... the point I am making is that there are complex organs and functions that we may not know in detail, but any time we investigate one of those we discover the details. And it's again, I'm going to put it bluntly, blasphemous to try to think of a God who is there waiting for something from time to time to come and intervene: "now I'm going to make an eye". Primitive organisms don't have eyes so God waited a few thousand million years - 2 and a half, 3 thousand million years - in order to have organisms with eyes, then later on did this and that. This is what the theologans in the old times called the "God of the gaps". Heresy, trying to justify God to account for things we don't know. You know, fill in the gaps. For things we don't know and aren't knowlegable by scientific research... we have science, we should do scientific research. We should not be putting this God as an engineer that is trying to fix little things from time to time. What sort of vision of God is that? Moreover there is another problem and it is that the implication of intelligent design is that God is a very, very bad engineer. Think of the example that I was telling you a moment ago, of the human eye. I mean, an engineer that could have designed an eye with the optic nerve having to cross the retina would be fired. You better do it the octopus way. An engineer that would have designed the human jaw would be fired. Our jaw is not big enough for all our teeth, so we have to pull the... the... the wisdom teeth and very often have to straighten the others and the orthodontists make a very good living straightening the teeth because we have too many teeth, too large for our jaw. An engineer that would have designed the jaw that is not big for the teeth would be fired. God making these trivial, obvious mistake in a universe of design. Well their God does these things, certainly not mine. I don't want to have to worship a God that did this... um, not smart enough to do as well as a human engineer.

Already in 385 C.E. the first Christians, the Spanish Priscillianus and six followers, were beheaded for heresy in Trier/Germany
Manichaean heresy: a crypto-Christian sect decent enough to practice birth control (and thus not as irresponsible as faithful Catholics) was exterminated in huge campaigns all over the Roman empire between 372 C.E. and 444 C.E. Numerous thousands of victims.
Albigensians: the first Crusade intended to slay other Christians.
The Albigensians (cathars = Christians allegedly that have all rarely sucked) viewed themselves as good Christians, but would not accept roman Catholic rule, and taxes, and prohibition of birth control.
Begin of violence: on command of pope Innocent III (greatest single pre-nazi mass murderer) in 1209. Bezirs (today France) 7/22/1209 destroyed, all the inhabitants were slaughtered. Victims (including Catholics refusing to turn over their heretic neighbours and friends) 20,000-70,000.
* Carcassonne 8/15/1209, thousands slain. Other cities followed.
* subsequent 20 years of war until nearly all Cathars (probably half the population of the Languedoc, today southern France) were exterminated.
* After the war ended (1229) the Inquisition was founded 1232 to search and destroy surviving/hiding heretics. Last Cathars burned at the stake 1324.
* Estimated one million victims (cathar heresy alone),
* Other heresies: Waldensians, Paulikians, Runcarians, Josephites, and many others. Most of these sects exterminated, (I believe some Waldensians live today, yet they had to endure 600 years of persecution) I estimate at least hundred thousand victims (including the Spanish inquisition but excluding victims in the New World).
* Spanish Inquisitor Torquemada alone allegedly responsible for 10,220 burnings.
* John Huss, a critic of papal infallibility and indulgences, was burned at the stake in 1415.
* University professor B.Hubmaier burned at the stake 1538 in Vienna.
* Giordano Bruno, Dominican monk, after having been incarcerated for seven years, was burned at the stake for heresy on the Campo dei Fiori (Rome) on 2/17/1600.

# 5th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain.
# 1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action).
# 1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. Thousands were actually slain.
# 1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee.
# 17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, "cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals... and then dumped him into the river [...but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [... and] dragged what was left ... to the gallows of Montfaulcon, 'to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows'."
# 17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller, "and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers."
# 17th century 30 years' war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany.

Downvote for instead of saying "Maybe this book should not be taken literally page to page, cover to cover." they say basically say "All of this book="bullshit."

A good bit of the Bible is supported by history. Many of the Bible's battles are known to have happened. The Bible even goes so far to give details of certain battles. It is even sometimes used as a historical source.

Now, lets go through all those verses that Penn and Teller starting pulling out around 8:30.

Exd 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

God permitted slavery to exist in both Old and New Testament times. But this does not mean that slavery was a God-ordained system. Slavery was an invention of fallen man, not of God. Nevertheless, God allowed it to exist the way He allows other things to exist that He does not approve of: murder, lying, rape, theft, etc.
God also works within the system of fallen man and makes allowances for the freedom and failures of mankind within that system. We see this, for example, in Jesus saying that God allowed divorce because of the hardness of peoples' hearts (Matt. 19:8). The fact is, people are sinners and do things contrary to the will of God. But, even though people have murdered, lied, raped, and stolen, God has still used people who've committed these sins to accomplish His divine will. Moses murdered an Egyptian but was used by God to deliver Israel. David committed adultery but was promised to have the Messiah descend from his seed. This is proof that though God desires that people not do much of what they do, He permits them their freedom, yet uses the system and the people according to His divine will.
In the case of a slave being property, that is simply the way things were done back then. As I said, God worked within the fallen system of man and put limits and guidelines concerning the treatment of slaves.

Exd 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.

While the New Testament assures us that the 10 commandments were not drafted simply for "another age.", Romans 13:1-10 assures us that the Church has adopted them for our time as well. However, since the whole Old Covenant (the Mosaic Law, as specified in 2 Cor 3:7-14) has been set aside (Hebrews 7:18; 8:13; 10:9), then the Church can pick the religious and moral practices from the Old Testament as she sees fit to use in the New Testament. Therefore, she can decide to use the 10 commandments but reject the civil and ceremonial laws that were tied to the theocracy of Israel (e.g., eating shellfish).

1Cr 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

One should note that national customs furnish an explanation here. 1 Cor was addressed to a Greek audience, where long hair on men often indicated effeminacy and indulgences in unnatural vices.

This is where I ran into a problem. They say that verses 19-24 say that a man shouldn't go near a woman when she is on her period...
I am going to post verses 19-24 and you can tell me where you see that, because I don't see it. Perhaps that was just a mess up on Penn and Tellers part.

1Cr 11:19For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

1Cr 11:20 When ye come together therefore into one place, [this] is not to eat the Lord's supper.

1Cr 11:21 For in eating every one taketh before [other] his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.

1Cr 11:22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise [you] not.

1Cr 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the [same] night in which he was betrayed took bread:

1Cr 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Will somebody let me know when they figure out what verse they meant?

This video dissapointed me. I usually like their show and often agree with them on many things. This would be an exception.

According to Wikipedia, "Irenaeus was an important figure defending the four main Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John in the New Testament in 170, stating in his Against Heresies: "But it is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the church has been scattered throughout the world, and since the "pillar and ground" of the church is the Gospel and the spirit of life, it is fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing incorruption on every side, and vivifying human afresh. From this fact, it is evident that the Logos, the fashioner demiourgos of all, he that sits on the cherubim and holds all things together, when he was manifested to humanity, gave us the gospel under four forms but bound together by one spirit."

hey Marr: I thought you'd appreciate knowing this... The historicity of Jesus the Christ has no basis.

1, Jesus the Christ, based of extant extra-biblical writings, is unheard of, and cannot be located in the century in which he was reported to have lived.
2, The multitude of followers of Jesus the Christ, based on extant extra-biblical writings, are unheard of and cannot be located in the century in which Jesus lived.
3, The teachings of Jesus the Christ, based on extant biblical writings, are also unheard of and did not affect any extant writings of contemporary extra-biblical writers.
4, There can be found no record of heresies concerning Jesus the Christ.

1990 on the copyright screen? Heresy! I was playing this game in 1986!

the problem with creationism is that it's a retarded doctrine by christian standards, it's almost neopaganism, half-baked gnosticism for sure. That you can PROVE that God exists is utter heresy, utter. (and not the good, "I have my own way" heresy).

Love how atheists use smug retort to heresy, while Christian's use Bible verses and emotionalism, thoughtfulness, and prayer....Both are beautiful, both camps struggling to actualize......keep up the struggle!

It didn't make 4 votes last time? Heresy!

this one won?? heresy

Well then you have to be smart Like Joan of Arc, see am busting scripture on your video picture:

The trial record demonstrates her remarkable intellect. The transcript's most famous exchange is an exercise in subtlety. "Asked if she knew she was in God's grace, she answered: 'If I am not, may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me.'" The question is a scholarly trap. Church doctrine held that no one could be certain of being in God's grace. If she had answered yes, then she would have convicted herself of heresy. If she had answered no, then she would have confessed her own guilt. Notary Boisguillaume would later testify that at the moment the court heard this reply, "Those who were interrogating her were stupefied." In the twentieth century George Bernard Shaw would find this dialogue so compelling that sections of his play Saint Joan are literal translations of the trial record."

LOL!