I said God allows evil to exist because He gives people the freedom to choose. It is better to have freedom and allow for evil than to have no freedom and be forced to act in a certain way. That in itself would be evil. I also said God can use that reality for beneficial purposes. Just because there is evil doesn't mean that God can't use that to fulfill His purposes. He isn't limited by evil. Evil is not a necessary part of His creation, but since humans keep choosing it, He works with it.

God destroyed the entire world in a flood that left 8 people alive. God is sovereign over His creation and we are under His law, and His judgement. Specifically, His condemnation was against wickedness:

"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."

He is not immoral for enforcing His law on immoral people. You seem to want to argue that people should be allowed to do whatever they want, and anytime God might punish someone, He shouldn't be allowed to. God would be immoral if He just let people do whatever they want..it's because He is just that he has laws that He does enforce.

>> ^Skeeve:
You said god allows evil to exist so people will "know" him. If he can stop evil, but does not do so, he is not a good being.
And your morality response is an absolute cop out. As far as we know, Hitler never murdered anyone. But because he ordered the deaths of millions we consider him evil. Your god ordered the deaths of an entire people (1 Sam. 15:2-3), the theft of property (Numbers 31:7-18), the abduction and rape of virgins (Deuteronomy 20:10-14) and the slavery of anyone not born an Israelite (Leviticus 25:44-46) and yet you consider him good? God specifically mentions the people of Samaria and that "their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open" (Hosea 13:16). How fucked up do you have to be to think this is a benevolent god?

You said god allows evil to exist so people will "know" him. If he can stop evil, but does not do so, he is not a good being.

And your morality response is an absolute cop out. As far as we know, Hitler never murdered anyone. But because he ordered the deaths of millions we consider him evil. Your god ordered the deaths of an entire people (1 Sam. 15:2-3), the theft of property (Numbers 31:7-18), the abduction and rape of virgins (Deuteronomy 20:10-14) and the slavery of anyone not born an Israelite (Leviticus 25:44-46) and yet you consider him good? God specifically mentions the people of Samaria and that "their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open" (Hosea 13:16). How fucked up do you have to be to think this is a benevolent god?
>> ^shinyblurry:

What I admitted to is that God allows you to have matches, and warns you that you could burn your house down, but if you ignore the warning He will still save your life..and you probably won't play with matches again in the future. If you listened to God you never would have burned your house down in the first place. God created a world in which evil did not exist; that He allowed us to screw up and bring it into the world means we have the freedom to choose. To take that away means we have no choice. What you are advocating is that God doesn't allow you to have matches, or if He does, to continually prevent you from abusing them. That isn't freedom.
As far as God breaking His own commandments, He would really only be subject to two of them, since the rest couldn't apply to Him. Lying, and murder. He never done either. He has never lied. He has killed, but it was never murder. Murder is to kill unlawfully. Under the law the penalty for sin is death. So if you want to point to places in the bible God took life, that was entirely lawful. Over 2 million people are born and die every day..giving and taking life is something God does all the time. That He is patient with us even though we are sinners shows His mercy. That He sent His Son to take our place so we could be forgiven and obtain eternal life shows His love.
>> ^Skeeve:
If I allow someone to burn your house down, only so that I can run in and save you when it is on fire so that you like me, am I a good person? You just admitted that your god does the same thing - allows evil to exist so humans will like him - so how can he be good? Why would anyone worship such a horrible creature?
As for the argument from morality that you have provided, if you provide me with something that is objectively evil, I will provide you with the bible verse in which your evil-ass god commanded someone to do it.>> ^shinyblurry:
Debunked? You're not a very good philosopher if you don't think there are any counter-arguments to this claim. First, the assumption here is that God and evil are mutually incompatible, or that God couldn't use evil to achieve His goals. If the entire purpose of your existence is to know God, and evil facilitates that, then God is capable of using it for beneficial purposes. Second, it presupposes that evil actually exists. So, if there is evil there also must be good, and there must be a moral law differentiating between the two, which leads to a lawgiver.
>> ^Skeeve:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?
Epicurus (c. 341 - c. 270 BC)
This garbage was debunked 2300 years ago.

I'd hate to see what happens to people who have some unknowingly magnetic alien element in their head from an abduction. Oh, that's right alien abductions aren't real. DAMMIT! If only there was a god...

Well, apparently it took the bible to get people to realize slavery is wrong because there has never been any abolitionist movement outside of the Christian west, anywhere. Jesus taught every man woman and child is equal under God, which was a new idea. That alone tells you it is wrong. If people followed that they would have abolished slavery a long time ago. As far as the old law is concerned, it is noted by Jesus that some commandments were given because of the hardness of mans heart. Meaning, at the time man simply wasn't ready to hear the message.

>> ^cosmovitelli:
Ah. Understood.
>> ^shinyblurry:
And sure, you could enjoy a meaningless, purposeless existence. You wouldn't be internally consistant and would have to delude yourself, but yeah you could enjoy if you didn't think too hard.



>> ^shuac:
<em>>> <a rel="nofollow" href='http://videosift.com/video/Christopher-Hitchens-badly-loses-debate-to-William-L-Craig#comment-1212374'>^JiggaJonson</a>:<br />
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/shinyblurry" title="member since January 21st, 2011" class="profilelink">shinyblurry</a> @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/jonny" title="member since July 10th, 2007" class="profilelink">jonny</a><br> <br> Even if jonny thinks he can be moral without god, and you think you can, it doesnt change the fact that god cannot grant a rule any more power or significance than it already has intrinsically. <br> <br> For example: It's wrong to murder. <br> Now if I say "Why is it wrong to murder?"<br> You saying "Well god says it's wrong" doesn't MAKE it wrong to murder.<br> <br> Try it in reverse to illustrate:<br> It's right to murder, everyone you come across should be murdered.<br> Now I say, "Wait that's not right, you shouldn't end another person's life!"<br> And you say "Well god says it's right to murder."<br> ^THAT doesn't all of a sudden make it right to murder (maybe in your mind, but maybe I'm talking to the wrong guy) So when it comes to morality, god really is irrelevant. <br> <br> <i>A rule is only as good as its intrinsic quality.</i><br> <br> p.s.<br> I never liked the ceo/king analogy in the first place, it makes huge assumptions about the existence of god.<br></em>
Correct, JiggaJ. I'd like to add a related point that slavery, which the entire civilized world now agrees is an abomination, was wholly endorsed by god, the author of the bible.
The only real restraint god provides on the subject of slavery is that we not beat our slaves so severely that we injure their eyes or their teeth (Exodus 21). Nowhere in the new testament does Jesus object to the practice of slavery. It even tells slaves to serve their masters well. Obviously, this is not the kind of moral insight that put an end to slavery in the United States.
Shiny may remind us that abolitionists also drew inspiration from the bible. I have no doubt they did. People have been cherry-picking the bible for millennia to justify their every impulse, moral and otherwise. This does not mean that accepting the bible to be the word of god is the best way to discover that abducting and enslaving men, women, and children is morally wrong. It obviously isn't...if you go by what the bible actually says about slavery.
The fact that some abolitionists used parts of scripture to knock down other parts does not indicate that the bible's author is the arbiter of morality. Nor does it suggest that it's a terrific idea for human beings to consult a book in order to resolve moral questions like this.
The moment a person recognizes that slaves are human beings like himself, having the same capacity for pain and pleasure, he will understand that it is patently evil to own them and use them like farm equipment. It is remarkably easy for a person to arrive at this conclusion - and yet, it had to be spread at the point of a bayonet throughout the Confederate South.
Real morality, independent of the demented god of the bible, is what we use to tell the difference between the bad and the good contained in the "Good Book."
[edit: damn this quote system! btw, I'm paraphrasing Sam Harris with much of the above]

>> ^JiggaJonson:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/shinyblurry" title="member since January 21st, 2011" class="profilelink">shinyblurry @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/jonny" title="member since July 10th, 2007" class="profilelink">jonny
Even if jonny thinks he can be moral without god, and you think you can, it doesnt change the fact that god cannot grant a rule any more power or significance than it already has intrinsically.
For example: It's wrong to murder.
Now if I say "Why is it wrong to murder?"
You saying "Well god says it's wrong" doesn't MAKE it wrong to murder.
Try it in reverse to illustrate:
It's right to murder, everyone you come across should be murdered.
Now I say, "Wait that's not right, you shouldn't end another person's life!"
And you say "Well god says it's right to murder."
^THAT doesn't all of a sudden make it right to murder (maybe in your mind, but maybe I'm talking to the wrong guy) So when it comes to morality, god really is irrelevant.
A rule is only as good as its intrinsic quality.
p.s.
I never liked the ceo/king analogy in the first place, it makes huge assumptions about the existence of god.


Correct, JiggaJ. I'd like to add a related point that slavery, which the entire civilized world now agrees is an abomination, was wholly endorsed by god, the author of the bible.

The only real restraint god provides on the subject of slavery is that we not beat our slaves so severely that we injure their eyes or their teeth (Exodus 21). Nowhere in the new testament does Jesus object to the practice of slavery. It even tells slaves to serve their masters well. Obviously, this is not the kind of moral insight that put an end to slavery in the United States.

Shiny may remind us that abolitionists also drew inspiration from the bible. I have no doubt they did. People have been cherry-picking the bible for millennia to justify their every impulse, moral and otherwise. This does not mean that accepting the bible to be the word of god is the best way to discover that abducting and enslaving men, women, and children is morally wrong. It obviously isn't...if you go by what the bible actually says about slavery.

The fact that some abolitionists used parts of scripture to knock down other parts does not indicate that the bible's author is the arbiter of morality. Nor does it suggest that it's a terrific idea for human beings to consult a book in order to resolve moral questions like this.

The moment a person recognizes that slaves are human beings like himself, having the same capacity for pain and pleasure, he will understand that it is patently evil to own them and use them like farm equipment. It is remarkably easy for a person to arrive at this conclusion - and yet, it had to be spread at the point of a bayonet throughout the Confederate South.

Real morality, independent of the demented god of the bible, is what we use to tell the difference between the bad and the good contained in the "Good Book."

[edit: damn this quote system! btw, I'm paraphrasing Sam Harris with much of the above]

>> ^chilaxe:

If this was real, wouldn't they be guilty of things like unlawful abduction?


Yes, but only if the thief presses charges

If this was real, wouldn't they be guilty of things like unlawful abduction?

I had a dream about this movie once...

Oceanic Flight 815, en route to Earth 2, crash lands on a desert planet infested with giant sand worms and zombies. In an attempt to get home, the survivors encounter Jeffrey Sinclair on board a space station caught in a time rift, who reveals that he has been chasing Q who is commanding an army of half-Scarran, half-Sylons with Goa'uld symbiotes to conquer a magical island in Neverland. And the only one who can save the universe is Jim Raynor, captain of a stolen Firefly, and his life partner, a half Wookie, half Time Lord who has sworn a life debt to the captain. They have a depressed robot sex slave who isn't attracted to them and each of them owns a power ring, bestowed to them by the Guardians of the Universe (who are all dwarves, except for one of them who is Tom Waits).

You don't even want to know who the crew of the Firefly is. It will blow your fucking mind. Ok, I'll tell you: Napoleon, Socrates, Sigmund Fruuud, Billy the Kid, Genghis Kahn, and Ludwig Van; then for some reason Whoopie Goldberg is there with William Shatner, Patrick Stewart, and Malcolm McDowell, who can't stop pining over Beethoven. At the end of the movie, the crew is clean cut, the robots are all shiny, and the ghosts of Bill Hicks, Rufus, Obi-wan, Pizza the Hut, Dr. Frankenfurter, and Alf are all sitting around waiting for you to wake up -- but, when you wake up -- you're Homer Simpson! OMG don't tell ANYONE about the twist ending or the sequel where he meets Hank Hill who gets abducted by aliens and meets spooky Fox Mulder and that sexy redhead Leeloo.

My mind is exploding! There may be another me who isn't as awesome as the real me and enjoyed the movie The Notebook... Pshhhhhh -- Frell the frack off. Every alternate reality of me smokes pot and makes or plays video games. Stop trying to change me, universe!

Tags for this video have been changed from 'unidentified, flying, object, evidence, alien, abduction' to 'unidentified flying object, evidence, alien, abduction' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

Another Texas sifter! Im actually less than an hour from the festival myself and I hardly ever go but always plan a trip in my head. You think there would be a lot of dirt about the eccentric owner on the web who fancies himself king of the area and supposedly he lives in a castle. I don't know how much of that is hearsay but eh whatev.


You should make it out there this year. It is a must see/do experience. Over 50 acres of things to do and see. Live jousting, music, magic, animal shows (the falcon show is awesome), things for kids, lots of beer and cleavage, great fair food (smoked turkey legs are a must), even live blacksmithing and glassblowing. There are a lot of people dressed up in period garb and everyone is generally pleasant. It can get crowded and if there is any rain there is mud galore, but it really is a trip back in time.

You may even catch a medieval wedding in the old chapel or the royal procession making its way through the streets, fake king and queen with a full court in tow.

My wife got "abducted" by barbarians one year. They just grabbed her and threw her over their shoulder. I had to "fight" a big, shirtless barbarian with two-handed swords to get her back. Random, but very fun.

>> ^AdrianBlack:

I thought that maybe the ice cream truck symbolized the gingerbread house. I'm sure if the Grimm story witch had wheels, she would have driven temptation to them as well.
Hansel and Gretel were also abducted in their own way, as they were kept and locked up. >> ^Opus_Moderandi:
I didn't catch the hansel & gretel reference either... maybe because they were abducted in this version? In the Brothers Grimm story, didn't they wander around til they came to the witches ginger bread house?



Aha.... ginger bread ice cream truck, now it's all coming together.

It seems stupid that she keeps repeating the same line. I don't think a girl who was really being abducted would shout "Someone help me, you're not my dad" repeatedly.

>> ^BoneRemake:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^BoneRemake:
This infuriated me !!!!!! FUCKIN ASS', man its pathetic of these people. Its funny how Stereotypically the people who you think would not do something are the only ones who did ( that is urban youth who wear their pants around their knees).

So you downvoted me because you think this whole situation is very upsetting. Well Fuck You sir...I'm in support of abducting more and more children. Studies have shown abductees are more driven (to escaping) and proactive (about escaping) and are more thoughtful and respectful (of the people training guns on them).
I'm only looking to make life better for the children, you bastard.

You think you know why I downvoted your comment ? you assume why I downvoted it.
you are being sarcastic, and at the same time a douche bag, this is nothing more then a reflection in the mirror as to how dumbass I can be on these walls. Someday you may be privy to why it was downvoted.


Look I get it...I'm funny and you're not it's just the way of things.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^BoneRemake:
This infuriated me !!!!!! FUCKIN ASS', man its pathetic of these people. Its funny how Stereotypically the people who you think would not do something are the only ones who did ( that is urban youth who wear their pants around their knees).

So you downvoted me because you think this whole situation is very upsetting. Well Fuck You sir...I'm in support of abducting more and more children. Studies have shown abductees are more driven (to escaping) and proactive (about escaping) and are more thoughtful and respectful (of the people training guns on them).
I'm only looking to make life better for the children, you bastard.


You think you know why I downvoted your comment ? you assume why I downvoted it.

you are being sarcastic, and at the same time a douche bag, this is nothing more then a reflection in the mirror as to how dumbass I can be on these walls. Someday you may be privy to why it was downvoted.