>> ^pumkinandstorm:

>> ^papple:
I only got 24 votes when I sifted this before <img class="smiley" src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/frown.gif">
http://videosift.com/video/Ballgirl-Removes-Cricket

At least you got an upvote from @BoneRemake on yours. All I got from him was a downvote and nasty comment. Perhaps he prefers crickets...or people that aren't named pumkinandstorm?


He likes to be a troll, leaving asinine comments on my page every now and then, so I share your misery. I just put him on my ignore list and it's gotten better.

BTW, shouldn't this video be a dupe then? There is an earlier submission available but the link is down. It can be revived with this link. I don't know it's a tricky situation....

>> ^my15minutes:

great tune, but think it's safe to say it's a dupe of this.
but you'll still get a point, for replacing the dead embed there.


Thanks mate ~ I'll dead and revive it

>> ^critical_d:

dead


Revived! Looks like The Onion changed something about their embed coding as it completely fails with it's "new" code and the previous code I was using. I hope that didn't kill everyone's Onion videos... Used a Hulu embed for now, you'll have to deal with the short commercial at the start until I can change it to something I like better--without commercials, higher quality, or better yet a direct Onion link...

Heh heh, no worries dude
In reply to this comment by lurgee:
damn, you blew your load out on that one. do you need a cigarette and a redbull to revive yourself?
cheers matey. we should do another 80's music themed lounge in the future. i will work on a playlist. ;
In reply to this comment by Barseps:
*70s
*Doublepromote for the nostalgia

damn, you blew your load out on that one. do you need a cigarette and a redbull to revive yourself?
cheers matey. we should do another 80's music themed lounge in the future. i will work on a playlist.
In reply to this comment by Barseps:
*70s
*Doublepromote for the nostalgia

>> ^HadouKen24:

Interesting.
It doesn't make much mention of Hermetic Qabalah, though. It briefly mentions that the texts reached scholars who used it to interpret ancient Greek writings. This interpretation of the Kabbalah was eventually also fused with the grimoire traditions (which also contained practices preserved from ancient Greece, along with Christian and Muslim elements), to the extent that after the 16th century, nearly all serious magicians also studied Kabbalah. And this continued on for several centuries.
The version used by practicing occultists--who usually spell the tradition as Qabalah or Qabbalah--was refined and popularized during the occult revival of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Alongside the occult revival, and with many overlapping figures, was a revival of Paganism and a general rejection of Christianity. These twin movements sort of bubbled along under the surface until the 60s and 70s, when they started gaining steam. And with the rise of the internet in the 90s, as access to the ideas grew, the movements exploded.
With the rather curious result that there are now thousands of self-professed Pagans and occultists who, with no affiliation with Christianity or Judaism at all, nonetheless study the Zohar and the Sepher Yetzirah with a great deal of energy. Naturally, the traditions one finds among these communities differ substantially from Kabbalah as practiced by Jewish adherents.


excellent synopsis!

Interesting.

It doesn't make much mention of Hermetic Qabalah, though. It briefly mentions that the texts reached scholars who used it to interpret ancient Greek writings. This interpretation of the Kabbalah was eventually also fused with the grimoire traditions (which also contained practices preserved from ancient Greece, along with Christian and Muslim elements), to the extent that after the 16th century, nearly all serious magicians also studied Kabbalah. And this continued on for several centuries.

The version used by practicing occultists--who usually spell the tradition as Qabalah or Qabbalah--was refined and popularized during the occult revival of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Alongside the occult revival, and with many overlapping figures, was a revival of Paganism and a general rejection of Christianity. These twin movements sort of bubbled along under the surface until the 60s and 70s, when they started gaining steam. And with the rise of the internet in the 90s, as access to the ideas grew, the movements exploded.

With the rather curious result that there are now thousands of self-professed Pagans and occultists who, with no affiliation with Christianity or Judaism at all, nonetheless study the Zohar and the Sepher Yetzirah with a great deal of energy. Naturally, the traditions one finds among these communities differ substantially from Kabbalah as practiced by Jewish adherents.

revived.

and always will be. >> ^ant:


Dead.

he can revive so why get mad! i didnt buy his outburst, the "fuck" was too quiet. I've died in softcore by surprise and i know what it sounds like. I think hardcore might be too stressful for me until im less into the game!!

>> ^renatojj:

When I was a kid I played with Construx, anyone remember that? Not legos, I despised legos, they're for babies. Construx had these knots that really hurt your fingers, specially when you had to snap them off. Toys should hurt you, the pain makes you stronger, helps you grow. Or something.
Now legos are everywhere, Construx is nowhere to be found, and you can build your own marble maze out of legos.
What is wrong with the world?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construx

Discontinued in '88, revived and discontinued again in '97. I can't say I'm surprised, either, considering how far Legos have come, what with all the motors, sensors and programmable stuff.

I had a ton of Construx as a kid, enough that at one point I built a "robot" that was roughly my own height. I use the scare quotes because there were no motors or other forms of self-motion. It was articulated, but I had to move it myself.

I had Legos, too, but not as much. I also had Lincoln Logs and Tinkertoy, both inherited from my uncles, so I guess I had a lot of construction toys. I probably spent more time building things in the yard with sticks, rocks and dirt than with any of these toys, though.

Not only do I live in the US, but I live Oklahoma, one of the most religiously conservative states. I don't have a great deal of respect for that brand of religion, for sure. Which is precisely why it's so galling to see a video that suggests that's just what Christians have to be like--that Christians who reject the Bibliolatry and hermeneutic cutting and pasting of those idiots somehow aren't real Christians, that rejecting the sheep-like credulity of these so-called faithful means that the thoughtful ones haven't actually thought it through. And somehow it is averred that those who cling to the ancient traditions of Biblical understanding are inauthentically Christian, since they don't accept the quasi-heretical doctrines of 19th century upstarts.

Clearly false. Yet that's the whole thrust of the video!



With regard to your last two paragraphs, I think we're starting to move away from straightforward commentary on the video. But that's alright with me, if it's okay with you.

As far as dogmatic authority goes, I think that you're partly right about some religions. Specifically, the big Abrahamic religions--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It's important to remember that this is not the entire world of religion (even if they are important), so there are a number of statements about them that will be incorrect about other religions--in fact, most other religions.

It's true that the Big Three do indeed seem to require acceding to the truth of certain propositions in order to remain in their historical form: e.g., that the Torah was revealed by God, that Jesus lived, died, and rose from the dead, and that Mohammad received the Qur'an from Michael. (for each religion respectively) There is certainly an important sense in which certain very liberal theologians are still Christian, but this is something very different than historical Christianity.

Nonetheless, this is something separate from moral authority. One may deny that there is anything correct about the metaphysical pronouncements of the Bible, and still accept that its moral teachings are profoundly important. This is precisely what philosophy Slavoj Zizek has done.

For most other religions, the number of specific propositions that must be accepted is few to none. Pronouncements about gods or salvation are amenable to multiple interpretations. The ancient Greek philosophers, for instance, were quite religious on the whole. Yet read a book on Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Platonism, and tell me what proposition about the gods that they agree on. You'll find it quite difficult.

The same can be said of Shinto, Hinduism, Buddhism, Western Pagan revivals, etc.

Moreover, I myself don't think that moral authority is actually essential to religion. It's certainly related to religion, but as I'm sure you've observed--there's not much of a correlation between religious belief and moral behavior. Simple observation shows most Christians to be liars. Morality is not why they are Christian.

Instead, I think it's something else--transcendence, and the promise of new states of being. Morality has almost nothing to do with this. The same man can be capable of the most holy ecstasies and raptures before the beauty of the God or gods that he prays to, a writer of the most delicately beautiful hymns and homilies--and the worst bastard on earth outside of church. Cardinal Richilieu was just such a person.

This is why we'll never get rid of religion, of course. But it's also why the monotheistic religions can be so dangerous. They incorrectly tie the ecstasies of the spirit to crude and intolerant dogmas, then demand that all others agree or face the sword or the pyre.

>> ^shveddy:

@HadouKen24 - All that you say is very dandy and very well may be true, but you'd be shocked at how widespread it is to cling to 19th century literalist beliefs. I'm not sure what country you're from, but here in the US it's remarkably common and even presidential candidates manage to think it despite pursuing the most powerful office in the world. I grew up in a particular Christian denomination, one of hundreds, and we had an official statement of faith that stated the absolute, literal, inerrant nature of the bible. This particular flavor of Christianity has about 3 million adherants, and again, this is only one of hundreds - many of which are even more conservative in their biblical interpretation.
When you say that it has been common for some time to regard sacred texts in a metaphorical sense I think that's definitely true, especially in the case of liberal theologians. However, when you take away the literal interpretations and leave interpretative metaphor all that remains is an interesting and influential piece of literature that has no specific authority. And I think this is a good thing. But the fact of the matter is that it lowers it to the same level as Moby Dick, Oedipus, Infinite Jest and Harry Potter - all of which are books that have interesting, moralistic metaphors just like the bible.
Let's face it, religion needs the teeth of absolute truth and the threat of moral superiority to have any privileged relevance over other interesting, moral works. I see neither in any of its texts.

3 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

When i saw how well "Apple iPorn" lined up, i died.

But then i got revived and died again to "If you see a parrot, run"

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm glad he wasn't trying to pull a @karaidl.

In reply to this comment by jonny:
Looks like they were all dead videos that weren't likely to be revived.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
What's with the mass *discard and *kill spree on your videos?

Hobbled for now until we sort this out. If you'd like to commit Sift-suicide, please don't take all your videos with you.

Looks like they were all dead videos that weren't likely to be revived.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
What's with the mass *discard and *kill spree on your videos?

Hobbled for now until we sort this out. If you'd like to commit Sift-suicide, please don't take all your videos with you.