The "anonymous" suggestion is a fair point. But that's the way that people donate to charity these days. Are you two prepared to say that about everyone else who donates and wants to see their name on the list? That everyone who doesn't donate anonymously is doing it for political reasons? I could understand how someone who donated, even if they didn't think about their name in print, would be upset if they got a call that said, "Sorry, but because of your beliefs, we can't put you on a pedestal like we do with every single other donor that contributes."

Well, the reason the FBB was donating was to be listed as one of the teams on the "relay for life" program. That's what they were turned down for. Not only that, but they used to whole thing to garner publicity. So I am not feeling too much sympathy for them at this point.

I agree that the reason many people/organizations who donate large amounts of money is specifically to get on those lists. So yes, I am prepared to say that many on those lists are doing so for political reasons. Perhaps not all of them, but I would say probably the majority.

We may live in a society where those with religious beliefs might feel that things are going downhill. But by and large, the majority of America is still very uncomfortable with Atheism. Something like 70% of Americans believe that Christ is the savior in one way or another. And most of the rest are still religious. So I think it's understandable that atheists feel the need to stick up for themselves. Especially in situations like this, where they can show that they still care for their fellow human beings, regardless of anyone's beliefs.

Well, I think the problem that most believers have is that the stated goal of many atheists and atheists organizations is to remove religion from the public sphere or irradicate it entirely. The mouthpieces for the New Atheism say in no uncertain terms that people who have faith are pinheads and that religion is the worst thing to ever happen. It's certainly not a live and let live kind of attitude that is being promoted as representing atheism.

Shiny! What a coincidence that I am just recently becoming acquainted with the first few verses of Matthew!

Ahh, but I don't believe in coincidence.

Someone was passing around a picture of this giant mega-church the other day that was all sparkles and spot-lights and looked like the bridge to the Starship Enterprise. Anyway, I found this reference to Matthew 6:6 and was very surprised by the fact that people don't seem to recognize it in their lives.

Yes, and sadly, that is just scratching the surface. The bible for many seems to be book of allegory, filled with mere suggestions on how to live our lives, rather than the direct commands of God. That's why you'll find Christians in bars, Christians smoking weed, and Christians cheating on their taxes. More than that, false doctrine has invaded the church. A very popular one right now is the "Health, wealth and prosperity" gospel, which teaches that God only wants you to be rich, and people who are poor and suffering just don't have enough faith.

Now, I understand that proselytizing and praying are two different things. So I'm not telling you to shut up. But the idea that praying should be done in secret, according to the bible, is something that I find remarkable given the televangelist America that we live in. And obviously, if people truly cared, they would apply that same idea to charity as well. Unfortunately, as QM said above, everything seems to be political, even praying.

That is the thing, that it is all being done for show. It is not about salvation, or sanctification; it is about sterling and silver. This is what is truly harmful, that the public face of Christianity is so far astray from the true teachings of the bible. Light years away from it in fact. The airwaves are saturated with false teachers, who proclaim that God is the great ATM in the sky, and if you only send in some money He'll give you the pin number. They are wolves in sheeps clothing, preaching a man-centered doctrine, to tickle the itching ears of people who seek out teachers who will tell them what they want to hear. "No, you don't need to change! God loves you the way you are!" The bible is not so kind to such people:

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.

Just out of curiosity, do you have a favorite version/translation of the bible? Because even simple things like the verses we're discussing seem to be changed around quite a bit. I especially love the ones that read Matthew 6:6 as: "Go into your closet to pray."

haha, yes..some of these translations are very poor/strange. I prefer the ESV, it is probably the best modern literal translation. The KJV can be a good supplement, because although it used less accurate manuscripts, its archaic language preserved some of the meaning that the more modern translations may have glossed over. bible.cc is a good site for comparing verses. Here's a good sermon on Matthew 6:5-6

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=813081634369


>> ^Ryjkyj:
The "anonymous" suggestion is a fair point. But that's the way that people donate to charity these days. Are you two prepared to say that about everyone else who donates and wants to see their name on the list? That everyone who doesn't donate anonymously is doing it for political reasons? I could understand how someone who donated, even if they didn't think about their name in print, would be upset if they got a call that said, "Sorry, but because of your beliefs, we can't put you on a pedestal like we do with every single other donor that contributes."
We may live in a society where those with religious beliefs might feel that things are going downhill. But by and large, the majority of America is still very uncomfortable with Atheism. Something like 70% of Americans believe that Christ is the savior in one way or another. And most of the rest are still religious. So I think it's understandable that atheists feel the need to stick up for themselves. Especially in situations like this, where they can show that they still care for their fellow human beings, regardless of anyone's beliefs.
>> ^quantumushroom:
I don't pretend to know the atheists' true motives, but everything is political. Everything. This arrangement sucks and I wish it were not so, but it is. An anonymous donation would've been more apropos if the highest goal was really helping the charity versus branding positive atheism.
As we both know, that doesn't hold true online. Why, we may be the only two peeps online now who even admit to not having all the answers!

Shiny! What a coincidence that I am just recently becoming acquainted with the first few verses of Matthew!
Someone was passing around a picture of this giant mega-church the other day that was all sparkles and spot-lights and looked like the bridge to the Starship Enterprise. Anyway, I found this reference to Matthew 6:6 and was very surprised by the fact that people don't seem to recognize it in their lives.
Now, I understand that proselytizing and praying are two different things. So I'm not telling you to shut up. But the idea that praying should be done in secret, according to the bible, is something that I find remarkable given the televangelist America that we live in. And obviously, if people truly cared, they would apply that same idea to charity as well. Unfortunately, as QM said above, everything seems to be political, even praying.
Just out of curiosity, do you have a favorite version/translation of the bible? Because even simple things like the verses we're discussing seem to be changed around quite a bit. I especially love the ones that read Matthew 6:6 as: "Go into your closet to pray." <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/smileopen.gif">
>> ^shinyblurry:
If they were humble, and this really was about helping cancer patients, they would have given the donation anonymously. Clearly for the atheists this was more about having a feather in their cap than helping people. Reminds me of this verse:
Matthew 6:2-3
Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.
But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

People do good things in the name of religion all the time.

It doesn't matter if they do the good things because they wrap themselves religion or wrap themselves in any moral code. In their minds, they are doing good because of their religion. They have a banner to gather around, creating community. And from that sense of not feeling alone, they do bigger and better things.

THEY need the religion to gather. They don't get it from other means. It is their choice.

It doesn't matter that you don't need that artificial structure to feel connected. They need that artificial structure. And from that artificial structure, good things flow.

Deny it all you want. People do good things in the name of religion all the time.

That is my sole and only point. And yes, I am 100% correct.

Here's an example.

My Baptist cousin had a bad relationship with her mother. Bad. It took decades for her to deal with it. But she suffered from that relationship the vast majority of her life. Finally, she got some psychological relief through Bible study. Nothing else worked for her. She is now a happier and more content person.

So some good came from religion. My cousin feels better.

I am 100% correct.

That is an easy thing to "win" though. No good, ever, at all, ever in the history of the world? You can't possibly be correct.

This all doesn't matter. You believe what you believe. Just as dogmatically as any religion. My other main point.

If I recall, Bush pushed for the bailout. Here is the Fox News article.

Yes, I am aware of this. It's a disgrace, more so than if a Democrat president initiated it. Bush was a liberal with a few conservative tendencies.

I've never been offered a job by a poor man, have you? Unless you're a vote-buying politician, you shouldn't overly concern yourself that someone else has more than you, nor blame them. Economics is not a zero-sum game.

I don't see your point at all here. People do not want to tax the rich more, they just want repeal the tax breaks that Bush implemented.

You may not want to tax the rich more, the socialists dream of nothing else. And raising taxes on the middle class and poor too. I'm here to tell you that repealing the rather modest Bush tax cuts will do nothing--NOTHING--to help the economy nor fill government coffers.


Unless you know otherwise, over the ENTIRE lifespan of these tax breaks, the economy has been on a downhill. How can you justify them then?

The problem goes back to spending more than we have, always will. I don't see how you can single out the tax breaks as being the single source for economic woes.


Remember this is tax breaks over income only, if the rich invest their money into their businesses, they are never taxed on that money anyways.

The profits are taxed. What I mean by 'zero-sum game' is this: socialists believe in order for someone to win at economics, someone else must lose. It's balderdash. Wealth is created not when the slices of pie are "more balanced" but when the pie itself grows larger.

Pussys dont change the way things work.

** that is to say, in more words- Hippies and this mediocre sit in bullshit does nothing, it changes nothing it wont change anything. I will eat this computer monitor if these walk through the streets with banners stuff ACTUALLY makes change, sure it gets in the news but does it do anything?

This negative nancy says no. If you are going to be an officer and blindly sit and do a job because " its my job" you got/get everything you deserve from mob mentality.

In reply to this comment by Boise_Lib:
>> ^BoneRemake:

I can't wait until you see the people flood over a barricade and envelope the police force like a swarm of fire ants.
Shitty to call for the pain of others, but it will be fairly good video to see when it does happen.
ten people to one cop= a bad time for the cop.
Yes I am advocating violence against violence.


Right, give all the people who are already calling for a heavy handed crackdown on the peaceful protesters something to put on every TV on Earth--everyday for months.

Good call.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^BoneRemake:
I can't wait until you see the people flood over a barricade and envelope the police force like a swarm of fire ants.
Shitty to call for the pain of others, but it will be fairly good video to see when it does happen.
ten people to one cop= a bad time for the cop.
Yes I am advocating violence against violence.

Right, give all the people who are already calling for a heavy handed crackdown on the peaceful protesters something to put on every TV on Earth--everyday for months.
Good call.


The people demand self-expression, and... if there is an outbreak of violence, it would not be without cause. We are yet far from the independence of our dream. The irresponsibility of the Centre, which eats up 80 per cent of the revenue, grinds down the people and thwarts their aspirations, is daily proving more and more intolerable. There is a growing consciousness of the terrible autocracy of the majority of the States.

The fact that violence must fail will not prevent its outbreak. Mere constitutional agitation will not do.

-Gandhi

I can't wait until you see the people flood over a barricade and envelope the police force like a swarm of fire ants.

Shitty to call for the pain of others, but it will be fairly good video to see when it does happen.

ten people to one cop= a bad time for the cop.

Yes I am advocating violence against violence.

Yes, I am okay with innocent people being imprisoned. The world isn't perfect. Caca occurs.

I am NOT okay with the state taking an action that is permanent. I am NOT okay with the state executing an innocent person. There is no coming back from that.

So Winston Pennypacker.

I'll ask you, yes or no, since @quantumushroom neglected to answer the question.

Are you okay with an innocent person being executed by the state? It is a yes or no question because guess what, it is fuck all a yes or no question. It is the ultimate in yes or no questions.

If you don't have the balls to answer it, then you should just back out of this conversation.

Say it. Say yes you are okay with an innocent person getting executed. It is a helluva a lot easier to say it is okay than it is ACTUALLY KILL SOMEONE.

Say it. Which you did not in your essay. Say you are okay with an innocent person being killed.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Are you OK with the criminal justice system inprisoning people who are innocent? Yes or no.

0:55 "Yes, I am using my willy at this point."

>> ^jmzero:

I agree with lots of video guy's premises, but not his conclusion.
Ron Paul does have wacky, wacky views on all sorts of crap. I disagree with him on most things. However, he's the only candidate who agrees with me on some important things - ie. sustainable foreign policy - and those few things are important enough to outweigh the other stuff (most of which, as others have said, he wouldn't be able to act on anyways).
In short: Ron Paul is wacky + deluded + currently the best option. It doesn't take insanity or fanboyism to say that, all it takes is a survey of the other candidates' positions.
He's marginally the best item on a buffet of crap (not that I'm picking anyways - I'm Canadian - but still).


And only his best policies will be supported by the legislator... yes, I can't spell right now and yes, I am making a lot of comments quickly...vacation and drinking does that.

I want to have your babies.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

This guy is an idiot. He obviously has no clue that no matter RP's personal beliefs, he doesn't let them affect his policy making.


Fucking I am glad to give this a 15 mark and this fucking douche cock can burn in hell (Oh, that's right, he doesn't believe in hell...fucktard still.)

And yes, I am drunk!

Christians judge peoples behavior based on its conformity to Gods laws. We are commanded by God to take a stand against sin and to expose it, where ever it may be. We are not to judge the person, for only God knows the heart, but we are commanded to tell that person about sin, and judgement, and about the salvation of Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:11

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

Matthew 28:19

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

I'll try to break down this video for you, because I think you are ascribing arrogance and judgement to Ray when he is merely following the gospel and trying to save this woman..

First he asks her what happens to someone when they die. She gives an answer about "soul recycling" which establishes that she doesn't know or believe that she will face Gods judgement.

Hebrews 9:27

And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,

Next he asks her if she thinks she is a good person. She states she thinks she is. God says there is no one good:

Romans 3:10

As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one

Romans 3:12

All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one

The reason there is no one good is because of sin. So to show her she is not in fact a good person Ray asks her about sins she may have committed. She admits to lying, stealing, lusting and blasphemy. Ray then informs her that she isn't a good person in light of those sins. She attempts to turn it back around on Ray but never gives an answer as to how she could be good yet guilty of those sins.

Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Next, Ray asks her if she will be innocent or guilty on judgement day. She affirms innocent. Ray then reminds her of the sins she just admitted to. Again, she tries to turn it around back on Ray but never gives an answer to how she will be declared innocent even though she is admittidely guilty of many sins.

The whole point of what Ray was trying to do was..

A. Establish to her that she is a sinner
B. Let her know she was going to be judged for those sins when she died
C. Let her know the verdict would be guilty without Christ

He wasn't trying to judge her, and said that flat out, that he was incapable of judging her. He also admitted that he was a sinner like her and was not perfect, that Christ was his only way out. I think people are getting offended by Ray when he suggests that this woman isn't a good person, because its the most popular lie that people like to believe. The truth is, no one is good, and everyone is a hypocrite who has never lived up to their own standard let alone the standard they judge other people by. People are not generally good, they are generally sinful. Everything Ray did here was by the book so I can't support your criticism here. I don't know what else Ray has done really..I haven't followed him too closely, but I don't see anything wrong with this.

>> ^enoch:
@shinyblurry.
judgement and discernment are not the same thing in the context you are trying to convey.
and you posted a most excellent verse to make your claim.please reread that verse...nothing about judging but EVERYTHING about patience and careful instruction.
to preach the word you have to understand the word.
ray comfort is clueless as a child when it comes to the word and he should be ashamed of his ignorance.
ambushing this young lady and then hiding behind scripture to defend his vitriol.
it is cowardly and vicious.
and one of the myriad reasons i find ray comfort to be a stellar douchebag of a human being.
at least YOU ask the questions shiny.
you seek to know and i have all the faith that you shall,but i plead with you to not give ray comfort any authority.he is a charlatan who dresses himself up as the faithful.
and yes..i AM judging him.

@shinyblurry.
judgement and discernment are not the same thing in the context you are trying to convey.
and you posted a most excellent verse to make your claim.please reread that verse...nothing about judging but EVERYTHING about patience and careful instruction.
to preach the word you have to understand the word.
ray comfort is clueless as a child when it comes to the word and he should be ashamed of his ignorance.
ambushing this young lady and then hiding behind scripture to defend his vitriol.
it is cowardly and vicious.
and one of the myriad reasons i find ray comfort to be a stellar douchebag of a human being.

at least YOU ask the questions shiny.
you seek to know and i have all the faith that you shall,but i plead with you to not give ray comfort any authority.he is a charlatan who dresses himself up as the faithful.
and yes..i AM judging him.

If one can find the video duplicated on YT or elsewhere, say with Google Videos Search, then yes. I am not authoritative but I would hazard that otherwise not.

Good luck to you and good to hear from you. Come through anytime.

Happy Sifting.
In reply to this comment by SpaceOddity:
Hey is there a way to submit Youtube videos that have embed disabled?