I made a chess set out of Velveeta, Ritz crackers, and Jimmy Dean sausage.
It was delicious.

That's a nut cracker.

>> ^PlayhousePals:

Grab your chocolate square, some graham crackers and add a marshmallow to the end of the stick ... voilà ... the ultimate S'more =oD

S'more shrapnel, maybe...

Grab your chocolate square, some graham crackers and add a marshmallow to the end of the stick ... voilà ... the ultimate S'more =oD

>> ^messenger:
Wow. I'm surprised to hear there are Christian churches that don't practice sacraments. Do you mean, none of them? No weddings, no communion, no confession, no confirmation, no last rites, no.... the other ones? Especially communion seems a strange omission since you were commanded by Jesus to do so. Or did you interpret, "Do this in memory of me" to only apply to the Apostles?


You won't find the word sacrament in the bible. Marriage, that is fine. Baptism too, although it isn't sprinkling like the catholic church teaches; it is full body immersion. Child baptism is not biblical. Christians should take communion, but not according to the pagan rituals of the catholic church, or regarding what they call the "trans-substantiation". The cracker does not literally become the flesh of Jesus, nor the wine His literal blood. It is simply something we do to symbolize our fellowship with Him, and the body of Christ.

The rest you have mentioned are nowhere to be found in the bible. They simply come from the traditions of the catholic church. It is not a Christian institution, and this is why neither you or your family has ever come to know Jesus Christ.

>> ^messenger:
With my question here, I was indirectly taking issue with your assertion that only if I pledge myself to Jesus can I truly commune with God. So in my question, my intent was to find out if you ever fully give yourself to any religion before Christianity, like become an active, fervent follower. I'm guessing the answer is no. If I'm right, then I don't see how you can say Christianity is the only way to commune with God. If I'm wrong, and you did fully dedicate your soul to some other religion first, then I'd simply like to hear about that experience.


My experience was, that after I became aware that God exists, He led me through the various religions and philosophies of the world over a number of years. He gave me clues along the way, leading me step by step, until He finally brought me to the bible. This was not a natural progression for me, because I had a big resistance to Christianity. It was actually one of the religions I thought was the least likely to be true. But He had given me signs beforehand about truth that was in the bible that I didn't understand at the time, so that when I started to read the bible, I could see it was His book. This gave me enough faith in it to give my life to Christ, and when I did, He supernaturally transformed my life. This isn't stated metaphorically; I mean it in a literal sense.

>> ^messenger:
I think you know what I believe and don't, and what I know and what I don't. At this stage, I think definitions are just semantics, and I'm not going to explain again what those words really mean. So, here's my official statement with all the contentious words taken out: I don't believe that any description of God I've ever heard is true, and I don't know if my belief is accurate.


What that means is that you don't know if there is a God or not. That makes you an agnostic and not an atheist.

>> ^messenger:
Seriously? You cannot claim to understand science, and then state that the burden for a non-claim lies with the person not making the claim. Scientist Anna says, "I believe the Higgs boson exists." Scientist Bob says, "I don't believe that the Higgs boson exists." Neither of them have any evidence. Anna is introducing a novel assertion about something. Bob isn't. Bob can ask Anne to prove it exists. Anne cannot ask Bob to prove it doesn't exist. Anne may, however, ask Bob why he doesn't believe it exists, since the Standard Model predicts its existence. If Bob shows why be believes the prediction is false, either by showing the SM has been used incorrectly, or stating he doesn't believe in SM at all, that's the end of his "burden" for that question. He does not have to scientifically prove the Higgs boson doesn't exist. He can't. It's logically impossible.


I understand I have my own burden of proof, but if someone wants to say that I am wrong, they are making a negative claim. It's up to them to provide reasons to substantiate their claim, and no, I don't think this need constitute absolute proof. If they're just saying "I don't know", then that is a different story. Most atheists don't want to concede that they don't know, because then they would have to admit that God could possibly exist, so they invent a new definition of atheism to obscure their true position.

>> ^messenger:
The theistic equivalent is you asking my why I don't believe in God. To this I tell you that to me, there's insufficient evidence, which is a position you should understand since it was exactly your own position until you got some direct evidence. That's the end of my "burden".


It depends on what you're trying to claim, about your own beliefs, or mine. Yes, I can relate to your position, having been there. That is why I describe atheism as religion for people who have no experience with God. I too was a true believer in naturalistic materialism until that veil was torn, and then I immediately realized that everything I knew, was in some way, wrong. Can you even conceive of such a thing, messenger? Do you care enough about the truth to be willing to let the tide take your sandcastle away from you?

>> ^messenger:
An equivalent for you might be if I asked you to prove to me that Thor and Ra don't exist. You couldn't. You could only give your reasons why you believe they don't exist. Same here. I'm in the same position as you, except I don't believe that Thor, Ra or Yahweh exist.


I wouldn't try to prove to you that Thor or Ra do not exist. I believe they do exist, but that they are not actually gods. They are fallen angels masquarading as gods, as with every other false idol.

>> ^messenger:
And my point is I wouldn't spend any effort trying to rule it out at all. I would just assume you're another false buried money promiser and move on. The reason I'm talking now isn't to rule anything out -- I never accepted the premise to begin with.


That's exactly the point; your conclusion is fallacious. You merely assume I am wrong because some people have made similar claims which were false. That is not a criterion for determining truth. If you had an incurable disease and only had a few days to live, and some people came to you promising a cure, and some of those claims turned out to be false, would you refuse to entertain any further claims and simply assume they are all false? I think not.

>> ^messenger:
Changing my whole perspective of the universe is an immense effort of mind. It's not "nothing". And why would I bother? Just to win an argument with you? Like I said above, I don't for a minute accept it's true, so I have no motivation for spending any energy proving it.


What effort does it take to entertain a possibility? You could simply pray something like this:

Jesus, I admit that I do not actually know if you are God or not. I would like to know whether it is true. Jesus, if it is true then I invite you into my life right now as Lord and Savior. I ask that you would forgive me for all of my sins, sins that you shed your blood on the cross for. I ask that you would give me the gift of faith, and help me turn from my sins. I ask that you send your Holy Spirit to me right now. I thank you Jesus for saving me.

If you pray that and sincerely mean what you say, then I have no doubt Jesus will answer it.

>> ^messenger:
1. No. If that's true, he gave me my life, and he can take it away if he wants to, but I have no respect for Indian givers.


It's appointed one for man to die, and then the judgment. He isn't going to take away your life, he is going to judge the one you have. Do you believe that you should be above His law?

>> ^messenger:
2. No. I don't serve anyone. He can do what he likes. He made me the way I am -- someone who relies on empirical evidence and sceptical about all superstition, and if he doesn't like it, it's his own fault. He should love me the way I am. And if he does, he should just let me come into heaven because he loves me, not because he needs me to worship him. I don't like egotists any more than Indian givers.


That isn't true; you serve yourself. If God has a better plan than you do, and your plan can only lead to a bad end, why wouldn't you serve God?

Yes, God made you the way you are, a person who knows right from wrong and has sufficient understanding to come to a knowledge of the truth. He loves you, but not your sin. He gave you a conscience to know right from wrong, and when you deliberately choose to do wrong, it isn't His fault. Yet He is patient with you, because He wants you to repent from your sin, so you can go to Heaven. As it stands now, you're a criminal in His eyes, and you are headed for His prison called hell, and He would be a corrupt judge if He just dismissed your case. But He is merciful and doesn't want to send you there. That is why He has given you an opportunity to be forgiven for your sins and avoid punishment. He sent His only Son to take your punishment, so that He can legally dismiss your case and forgive you, but also you must repent from your sins. If you refuse to stop doing evil, why do you think you should be allowed in?

>> ^messenger:
3. Yes and no. Yes, if Jesus turns out to be God, then there'll be no faith required. I'll know it. You can't disbelieve something you know is true. But no, I wouldn't trust him. A god isn't by definition benevolent or omni-anything. If he told me to accept that anal sex is a sin, he and I would get into a debate about what "sin" really is, why he defined sins to begin with, why he created the universe such that people would sin, why sin displeases him, and how those people can be faulted for following God's own design. And if the only way he could convince me he was right was by threatening me with eternal torment in a pit of fire, and promising to reward me with eternal happiness if I agreed with him, then I'd think he must have a pretty weak argument if he has to resort to carrot and stick tactics. I likewise don't like people who resort to violence or threats of violence to make people agree with them.


There'll be no faith required when you die and see Jesus at the judgment seat, but it will also be too late to receive forgiveness for your sins. Neither is God trying to convince you that He is right, because your conscience already tells you that you are wrong. You know that you are a sinner, and that you've broken Gods commandments hundreds, if not thousands of times. You're acting like I don't know you are a human being. What are you possibily going to have to say to a Holy God with your entire life laid bare before Him?

6:15am: Get out of bed and smoke cigarette before baby wakes up. Make coffee immediately so that eating breakfast and lunch can be avoided.
7:00am: Begin third cup of coffee.
8:00am: Sit on couch and encourage child to run around. Avoid running after him for any reason.
10:00am: Drive two blocks to school. Park at median height of campus to avoid walking uphill either direction.
11:00am-4:00pm: Have to walk off campus now to smoke. Every time I get back to class I want another one already. Can't complain, out of breath anyway.
5:00pm: Go to store, buy ranch dressing for tater-tots and vinaigrette for wife's salad.
7:00pm: Spend an hour cooking ultra-healthy, carb-free meal for wife and son. Snack on cheese-crackers and diet soda (not because it's diet, I just like it better).
9:00pm: Put son to bed, go outside to smoke and play with bokken: today's only exercise.
9:30pm-12:00am: Fold laundry, clean, homework, etc.
1:00am: First meal of day: leftover pastry dough I made for pie wrapped around salami and some lettuce (gotta eat your veggies).
2:00am: Wake up on couch to Galactica credits. Go to bed. (I average the actual, completely awake viewing of one episode every four days at this rate.)

There, now I don't even need a Fitocracy profile.

Rock on!!! x
In reply to this comment by eric3579:
She's got stickers on her locker
And the boy's number's there in magic marker
I'm hungry and the hunger will linger
I eat sixteen saltine crackers then I lick my fingers

Well every morning I deliver the news
Black hat white shoes and I'm red allover
She's got a big mailbox, that she puts up front
Garbage in garbage out, she's getting what she wants

Who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous of who?
If I get busy then I couldn't care less what you do
But when I'm by myself I think of nothing else
Than if a boy just might be getting through and touching you

Spike heels make a hole in a lifeboat
Jumpin' and waving, I'm talking and laughing as we float
I hear a whistle, that's how I know she's home
Lipstick, eyelash, broke mirror, broken home

Force fed, force mixed 'till I drop dead
You can't defeat her, when you meet her you'll be what I said
And Lord knows there's a method to her madness
Bustin' those jokes as I float in a sea of sadness

She doesn't know but when she's gonna sit and drink up a few
I'm sure she's drinkin two, but wondering what for and who
And I'm solo rollin'. I'm one side off the boat.
Looking out, throwing up, a lifesaver down my throat

Who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous of who? (x3)

She's got stickers on her locker
And the boy's number's there in magic marker
I'm hungry and the hunger will linger
I eat sixteen saltine crackers then I lick my fingers

Well every morning I deliver the news
Black hat white shoes and I'm red allover
She's got a big mailbox, that she puts up front
Garbage in garbage out, she's getting what she wants

Who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous of who?
If I get busy then I couldn't care less what you do
But when I'm by myself I think of nothing else
Than if a boy just might be getting through and touching you

Spike heels make a hole in a lifeboat
Jumpin' and waving, I'm talking and laughing as we float
I hear a whistle, that's how I know she's home
Lipstick, eyelash, broke mirror, broken home

Force fed, force mixed 'till I drop dead
You can't defeat her, when you meet her you'll be what I said
And Lord knows there's a method to her madness
Bustin' those jokes as I float in a sea of sadness

She doesn't know but when she's gonna sit and drink up a few
I'm sure she's drinkin two, but wondering what for and who
And I'm solo rollin'. I'm one side off the boat.
Looking out, throwing up, a lifesaver down my throat

Who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous who's jealous of who? (x3)

Funny, the only thing I could think of was that Cenk looked like my two year old having a fit because I won't let her have another graham cracker.

>> ^TheDreamingDragon:

I watched this video,and all I could do was imagine a different setting.
Cenk dressed as a peasant shouting up at some silk clad bejeweled Lord smirking at this comic farce of a discussion. The Lord sips his wine,and sighs as the serf rages on,because he knows that the wall seperating them is high,and the swords guarding the Lord are sharp. The Lord is indulgent,amused,and a few empty words will dismiss this minor irritation to a near perfect day. The senator smirks,because he knows nothing will be done and he can go about his business lining his pockets with whatever scorn is heaped on him,since all it really is to him is empty air.
Lords and serfs. Perpetuating this illusion of a democratic process. When the serfs Occupy someplace embarassingly public,the Lords send the Swords to cut them down.

I was almost in an accident like this once. My girlfriend and I were driving through California near Modesto on a two-lane, 50 mph back-road in the dark. Our right front tire went over the line into what looked like more pavement but was actually soft, dry, desert dirt. We just barely kissed the line but it was enough to send us off the road towards a tree, my girlfriend over-corrected and brought us back on the road and into the oncoming lane. We passed through the space between two cars, went off the other side of the road, over-corrected again (because we were really just fishtailing at that point), drove back through oncoming traffic, sideways, and stopped in our original lane facing the wrong way.

I always think of that when I see car accident videos. That and the fact that we were driving an early Hyundai Accent, the kind that would've vaporized had we actually hit anything. For a few seconds there, floating in the space between two cars, my whole existence was entirely dependent on luck, or fate if you wish. It felt very weird, and a damn-sight unfair.

It's really easy to say that this guy was driving irresponsibly, or to say that one needs to respect semis, but it looks like he was going with the flow of traffic, maybe just a little faster. Those moments like this happen before you even know what's going on. Your tire brushing that little pile of melting snow can start a series of events that you have no control over. And driving slower than the rest of traffic can be just as dangerous, especially in the snow.

But I'm not trying to be preachy. The thing that really amazes me is that when people see these videos, we always tend to think of ourselves as being in the place of the driver who fucked-up. We could just as easily, however, be the other guy. Happens every day, all over the world. You're driving safely in your own lane, minding your own business, and all-of-a-sudden you're pink pate' getting spread nicely over a crispy metal cracker. Nothing you could've done. Driving is dangerous.

crap on a cracker.

Nice. Animal Crackers is my favorite.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Snoop, Dogg, Doggy, Price is Right, Drew, Carey, Lincoln, cracker, shizzle, nizzle' to 'Snoop Dogg, Price is Right, Drew Carey, Lincoln, cracker, shizzle, nizzle' - edited by xxovercastxx

I wonder if there is a video in existence with the power to make males feel objectified in the same way that Girls Gone Wild type videos make females feel objectified? I'd like to know what that feels like, but our culture just isn't even handed when it comes to gender and sexuality issues.

It's sort of like when Louis CK says that racial epithets like 'cracker' or 'honky' are not particularly offensive or menacing to most whites, they're just silly words - not to justify black racism towards whites. I applaud issy and hpqp's subversive rebuttals to the Christmas boob video, but I can't imagine too many males feeling oppressed by this. I think most guys who are relatively secure in their sexuality would find this funny. If anything, it seems like a fair trade: naked ladies for naked men.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Well, I have to channel gay Dag to determine this. (What's that you say? shouldn't be difficult?) I think this is too retro and ridiculous to have real sex appeal. Tom Selleck was a winner.>> ^hpqp:

Does it pass the test? >> ^dag:
Hmmm.

Shame it only went for two seasons. Was a cracker of a show. The contestants were complete wankers most of the time and you looked forward to seeing them suffer.