I wouldn't usually post something like this, but in this case I had to make an exception. I'm still trying to figure out if she's serious.

This video converted me to Christ.

Why isn't there a "Face-Palm" Tag?!

I promise to think about it while I motorboat her. That's where most of my epiphanies happen.

BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBR

Fucking books, how do they work?

If you check out the rest of her videos, it's clear that she is trolling. Still, it's an amusing parody.

Duh, easy...but first answer this: was Jesus a Christian?

Was Jesus a human being? If he was half-god then I'd say he was a part-alien and Jewish.

Is Christianity a UFO cult? Think about it.

Think about it.

Implied facepalm.

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/7/2011/02/e7f0c86e4f9d7cacff7ebdb03f2a8d48/original.jpg

The bible was written by a person who wanted control and power over a massive amount of people.

worked pretty good didn't it.

It was obviously written by The Flying Spaghetti Monster, blessed be His noodly appendage, as a test of our faith.

That's easy, Thomas Jefferson!

But tell me, would this girl be wiser and less ignorant as an aethist? I doubt it, but that's all I hear. "Aethism breeds ignorance..." Or perhaps, people have always been such?

Oh, and I think this vid has been posted before...

Troll, but I still this type of "thinking" still used. You know like Bill O'Reilly. If I can't answer question "x" then I award God with a gold star...

BTW, I don't think the term "atheism" is ubiquitously used in the Atheist community as "isms" decry a sense of belief. Were as being an Atheist means you believe in simply nothing, making atheism most likely to be used as the dictionary says as it deals with more than one person and also as religious folk use it in an attempt to unjustly malign it as a religion as well. Even the dictionary tries to paint it in the light as a disbelief, but is more a disbelief in the sense that "Plato had the right ideas and theories". Like Bill O'Reilly, except he probably hated Plato and loved Revelations (BTW, I don't think they knew what that term really meant, I never found even one revelation in it)...

Atheist is even described by some dictionaries as a disbelief in a God, or a belief that there is none. The truth for many Atheists is that we've never found evidence (and usually quite the opposite) to follow any God as they have no realistic claim on reality. Same with FSM, Car Bears, Pink Unicorns, and that usually summons a critical thinking stage that everyone seems to miss that unique to Atheists. We check up on ideas and teachings, all the while giving a rating to it either as probable or total bullshit. Problem is that we find bullshit in that direction every-time we look.

C'est la vie.

The Bible was written by many people for many reasons. It's part religious doctrine, part philosophy, part mythology, part history, part political propaganda, part revenge fantasy, part pulp fiction, part erotic fiction, part poetry, part law book, part cook book and part science book. Although repressive by today's standards, I get the feeling it was progressive in its time. >> ^jmd:

The bible was written by a person who wanted control and power over a massive amount of people.
worked pretty good didn't it.

I do believe it's *parody

Adding video to channels (Parody) - requested by calvados.

You know, He boiled for your sins!
>> ^WKB:

It was obviously written by The Flying Spaghetti Monster, blessed be His noodly appendage, as a test of our faith.

She is my new favorite troll: http://videosift.com/video/God-1-Atheists-0

Jews.

To quote Tim Minchin:

Good point, let me think for a bit -
no wait, my mistake. That's absolute bullshit.

By this logic are Jews Aliens? Think about it. Think about it.
>> ^joedirt:

Was Jesus a human being? If he was half-god then I'd say he was a part-alien and Jewish.
Is Christianity a UFO cult? Think about it.
Think about it.

Well first, the bible wasn't written singularly but rather a collection of a variety of 'apostles' own writings. Which you should know if you've ever opened one of these books.

Second, the ones in the bible were written from 50 to 200 years of his 'death'. They were all a second, third or fourth generation telling of the tale.

Third, in the very earliest 'books' that eventually went on to become the bible, the first one we know about, Jesus was never talked about as a real person but rather as a spiritual being. It wasn't until 'many' years later that the spiritual 'son of god' was given a story of his supposed life. All those manuscripts and 'books' of the bible, at least a hundred of them, conflicted greatly about the 'man'.

Fourth, the story of Jesus mirrors almost exactly other gods in ancient mythology. It is a 'very' common theme going back many thousands of years. Jesus was far from the first 'son of god' and far from the first who was resurrected after his untimely death.

In the end it is easy to understand that A: The bible was not written by god, and B: Jesus was originally an idea of a man. Jesus was so 'perfect' because he was a symbol and his life story was just taken from that of far older stories of other gods who were the son of god and fleshed out over many hundreds of years until finally around the sixth century a group came together and chose the 12 books we have today (from at least one hundred) to form the bible you know of today.. although that has constantly been reshaped as well.

Did I just write all that when I could have just said;

'Your an idiot.' ?

We should have a Poe's Law channel.

duh!! clearly God had a ghostwriter employed. I mean, for fuck's sake, that dude is way busy, just like pro-athletes and politicians. He probably hired the same guy that did W's memoirs.

I've been using Videosift for a while now, never felt compelled to comment until I watched this video and read the comments. I've watched every atheist video that's been uploaded and watched it with an open-mind, I was ashamed to see this had been posted merely for comedic purposes.

It's a bit "Fox News" to only promote one side of an argument and then show the worst of the opposing view. I know that it's a long standing debate whether there is or isn't a God but let's try and be mature about how we discuss it.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:

By this logic are Jews Aliens? Think about it. Think about it.
>> ^joedirt:
Was Jesus a human being? If he was half-god then I'd say he was a part-alien and Jewish.
Is Christianity a UFO cult? Think about it.
Think about it.



Atheists, what is wrong with the world today? Think about it, think think about it.

>> ^Toshley:
It's a bit "Fox News" to only promote one side of an argument and then show the worst of the opposing view. I know that it's a long standing debate whether there is or isn't a God but let's try and be mature about how we discuss it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you don't have to give equal weight to both sides of the argument if one side is total crap.

Okay, give dummy lady a break. She meant to say "Who inspired the bible" but put foot in mouth. It happens to most everyone at least a couple of times a day. Kind of like saying "Everyone is having sex by this age mom!" Or, "Man, I was flying down the highway." Really? Flying in a space ship?

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
>> ^Toshley:
It's a bit "Fox News" to only promote one side of an argument and then show the worst of the opposing view. I know that it's a long standing debate whether there is or isn't a God but let's try and be mature about how we discuss it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you don't have to give equal weight to both sides of the argument if one side is total crap.


But one side is not crap. There are two sides that are crap here. Those who believe in god and those who think lowly of those people... Humanity created religion because it needed to be controlled. Get rid of religion, and we still need to be controlled... So the problem is humanity, not religion. That is the point of view needing most weight...

Even aethists feel the need to be controlled... Just not by some artifical being.

In fact, to add a point. Faith in god may be misplaced---but faith is still science based. It keeps people alive who should be dead, it is there from birth to death, it is a human condition.

>> ^Toshley:
I've been using Videosift for a while now, never felt compelled to comment until I watched this video and read the comments. I've watched every atheist video that's been uploaded and watched it with an open-mind, I was ashamed to see this had been posted merely for comedic purposes.
It's a bit "Fox News" to only promote one side of an argument and then show the worst of the opposing view. I know that it's a long standing debate whether there is or isn't a God but let's try and be mature about how we discuss it.


Well said. Most close their minds dead because they have the "superior" point of view supported by the "facts." While that may or may not be true, that still makes them just as self righteous as the religous people they loath... or the anti-global warming people too...

I don't believe in god, but internet atheists tend to annoy the hell out of me the same way Evangelical Christians tend to annoy the hell out of me.

>> ^AeroMechanical:

I don't believe in god, but internet atheists tend to annoy the hell out of me the same way Evangelical Christians tend to annoy the hell out of me.


There is no position, ideology or movement one might associate oneself with and not be in fucking horrible company.

Okay, give dummy lady a break. She meant to say "Who inspired the bible" but put foot in mouth.

But one side is not crap. There are two sides that are crap here. Those who believe in god and those who think lowly of those people

Humanity created religion because it needed to be controlled.

In fact, to add a point. Faith in god may be misplaced---but faith is still science based. It keeps people alive who should be dead, it is there from birth to death, it is a human condition.

This woman could be the vice-president.

I'd argue religion came about because people could be controlled with it. To say there's a need for that seems like an a posteriori argument to me.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

Humanity created religion because it needed to be controlled. Get rid of religion, and we still need to be controlled...

>> ^Toshley:

I've been using Videosift for a while now, never felt compelled to comment until I watched this video and read the comments. I've watched every atheist video that's been uploaded and watched it with an open-mind, I was ashamed to see this had been posted merely for comedic purposes.
It's a bit "Fox News" to only promote one side of an argument and then show the worst of the opposing view. I know that it's a long standing debate whether there is or isn't a God but let's try and be mature about how we discuss it.


The problem here is that the best kind of video a religious person could make would be one representing tolerance of all faith and lack of faith, and that is sorely lacking in today's society. Not that there aren't a lot of people who believe in tolerance, but that there aren't many *outspoken and interesting* middle of the road believers who are talking about it. The closest I have seen is one sentence in Obama's inauguration speech.

VideoSift is a website fueled by the users. As a person who feels strongly about a balanced point of view, it is *your* responsibility to find interesting videos supporting faith.

you are awesome. that is all.
>> ^Psychologic:

Fucking books, how do they work?

Animals, when I first read this reply, I did not know who wrote it. When I read your name, I smiled. Thank you Animals, not just for the apology, but for the insight of how a good man's mind can work when not blinded by the Blizzard-Of-Hate (Or, less that Blizzard, blinded by the rhetoric of his own mind.) For the record, I used to be an unequalled troll. I was God back then, and no one was allowed to have 'silly' ideas outside what 'should be,' but I did have one flaw. I looked to myself and asked questions. And I did not like my own answers.

As to you being immutable--it is true that I assumed you would not readily change

To the well-answered points you made;

Even if this video is a parody, some religious evangy would gobble this response up and spew it back out. But they would probably mean "inspired the bible", and yet still the sift would pound away for a simple mistake of words-versus-meaning. On a side note, I have heard far worse than this video's content from godly men--and it was stated in seriousness. I still cringe...

You bring up the multiple levels of feelings on this issue... To that I say and ask--it is factually true what you say, but when so many tiers/levels are calculated, doesn't the entire tier system become useless? (He is middle class making 40,000$. He is 'above middle class, making 40,005$, and so forth and so on.)

I tier this argument into three simple groups, Those that Believe, Those that Do Not, and Those who Couldn't Care Less. I fall into the Care Less. I know that list is subjective, and probably wrong of me, but I do it simply for simplicity.

Onto control--every nation, country, culture, etc. of humanity has created some form of control. Whether norms, government, religion, taboos, implied demands--or something societal, like commercialism--there has not been a gathering of man that has not exerted control. I am not saying control is evil, mind you--just necessary. In fact, when man is left untouched by any which way by another man (I.e. abandoned from birth, and never in human contact,) he becomes feral, and nothing smarter than an animal.

The control points I bring up are cheap for one reason--it just is easy to say and give examples. Kind of like 'humans need food.' So it is simple of me to say, and offers little but I feel it needs said.

Again, thank you fro proving me wrong.

>> ^AnimalsForCrackers:

Okay, give dummy lady a break. She meant to say "Who inspired the bible" but put foot in mouth.

>> ^rebuilder:
I'd argue religion came about because people could be controlled with it. To say there's a need for that seems like an a posteriori argument to me.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Humanity created religion because it needed to be controlled. Get rid of religion, and we still need to be controlled...


Well then, people don't need much of anything, do we? And then we just argue about miniscule details in our observations and assessments. For example, people only need their dna, their flesh and blood and organs--etc. That makes them human. They do not need thought, food, water, stimuli, etc. After all, people can choose to just die, instead of eating and drinking. Or they could decide to go into a stupor...

But isn't that just nitpickity? See my answer to Animal's debate with me over the need for control... (I personally attribute 'needs' to universal norms, regardless of culture. We all need to eat, need to sleep, need government of some kind, need to reproduce, currency, etc...)

But you are technically right...

*dead

Invocations (dead) cannot be called by DuoJet because DuoJet is not privileged - sorry.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by geo321.