Your video, Pomplamoose Rocks Mrs. Robinson, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Hey there,
I'm in and out of the Sift, so I'm just now taking a look at some of the comments on my Dr. Seuss Bible post. I wanted to thank you for your comment (about a month ago, now) mentioning how very unfunny a Crucifixion Machine actually is.

The video definitely has some dark humour.. that I wasn't quite sure how to take myself. (You might have noticed my caption) So I mostly preferred to present the video as-is and let other people decide for themselves how they were going to take it.

I love seeing the different styles and methods people use to retell stories - and yes, that includes sacred texts. Sadly, as you said, some people are too "eager to mock Christianity" to notice the cruelty in what was being presented. While I'm certainly glad a lot of people appreciated the humour in the video, I'm equally glad someone spoke out about the cruelty of it too.

So thanks!

I don't expect you to answer all of the questions that I asked. It is enough that you read them.

I will stop being a wind bag and try to focus for the sake of simplification. I will also try to stop assuming what you believe.

Do you believe that there is a God with a consciousness, separate from humans?
And it has the power to manipulate matter and energy at will?
And it cares about human morality?
And tries to communicate with humans?

Do you believe in the existence of heaven and hell as places that exist where souls go when you die?

"Everybody gets to interpret scripture how they want to," and then proceed to interpret The Bible as YOU want to, in order to make a point." - Do you believe in a literal reading of the Bible or do you believe it needs to be interpreted? If you believe the Bible can be interpreted, how do you know which interpretation is correct? How can you know which interpretation God would want?

“they obviously don't understand Jesus Christ AT ALL” – Explain Jesus to me.

Please read Matthew 15:1-28. What do the following verses from this passage tell us about Jesus?

Verse 16
Verse 24
Verse 26
Verse 28


In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I don't even know where to start replying to your many comments. Do you seriously want me to justify my claim that religion should promote tolerance and reason with scripture? I could do it, but it would take me hours to explain all of doctrine to you. I have indeed both read and studied The Bible on my own, in over five religious courses and one secular, and in two courses at the university level. I am traveling to Jerusalem in January to further study The Old and New Testaments. I am not one of those people who think that you can prove anything about The Bible by quoting a few scriptures. I have no desire to argue with a person who makes points that I have already made (as if I disagree with you about them), and who answers with essays that don't even seem to be a direct rebuttal for me, but for all of Christianity. It annoys me when people assume things about what I believe, and it further annoys me when you say things like, "That is the problem. Everybody gets to interpret scripture how they want to," and then proceed to interpret The Bible as you want, in order to make a point. You can't dismiss biblical interpretation as arbitrary and then make definitive statements about how it supports slavery, torture, forcing women to marry their brothers-in-law, etc. That's just ridiculous.

I hope that I don't sound too hostile. I have a very fiery temperament, but I assure you that it's all in good fun and that I do appreciate your comments and enjoy heated discussions. I think that you are an intelligent person and that you made good points, but what am I supposed to do with that quagmire that you gave me, honestly? I don't have that kind of time nor stamina.

Some lectures are futile..

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I came very close to trying to teach you what your mother failed to teach you about being a gentleman, but I decided against it.

HEY! I've got your back more often than not. Of course I half meant it...but it's not only an exploitation of the stereotype of women drivers. It was also a play on the stereotype of how men never listen...

...and how women bake delicious cookies. Don't you like cookies?!

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
At the risk of BEING that psychobitch, I'm gonna say that I was surprised that five people upvoted this comment, but then I looked at who voted for it, and I thought, "Nah, it's okay. Only some douchebags."

Your sexist joke is so sexist that it is almost funny. It would actually be funny if I didn't think that you meant it.

>> ^rottenseed:
>>dude, we all know it was a "her" but if somebody says it's a "her" some psychobitch is going to make an account just to nag about how women aren't bad drivers and about how they something something something, i don't know I wasn't listening to the woman in my made up scenario...

...hopefully she's baking cookies though

Don't bother, she taught me to never trust a mormon.

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I came very close to trying to teach you what your mother failed to teach you about being a gentleman, but I decided against it.

Posted this with you in mind, re our last talk: http://www.videosift.com/video/Melbourne-University-The-Problem-of-Evil

“ your 37 years of experience, I'm sorry to say, do not exhaust all of the possibilities religion has to offer.” I in no way implied that I had exhausted all of the possibilities of religion, but I am no going to limit my understanding of morality to Jesus, The Bible or a Christian church like many Christians do. Many Christians believe that Jesus and the Bible hold the ultimate truth for morality, similar to what other believers do with their holy books. It is the truth and there is no need to go anywhere else.

Also, many religious people dismiss scientific findings. They don’t see that humans are like other animals and have instincts. That is why 13 or 14 year olds are having sex. It is normal. It may not be a good idea but it is normal. Religious people hold these ideals of sex and marriage that don’t take into account human instinct. They can’t understand why men are so easily distracted by beautiful women or cleavage. They can’t understand why porn is a $12 billion a year business. They can’t understand why people cheat on their spouse. They can’t understand why a 40 something year old man want to divorce a wife of similar age and go off with a 20 something year old woman. “It just isn’t part of God’s plan.” Religion doesn’t talk about pheromones, hormones and neurotransmitters which are an integral part of the decision making process for humans. Religious people think that people just make good or bad choices, but they can’t understand why they make those good or bad choices, especially when it comes to sex. Religion is overly simplistic.

If I need to get into more detail about sex and religion, I can if you ask. The oppressive culture regarding sex, created by Judaism, Christianity and Islam, is very harmful to society and individuals. It creates women who don’t understand the sexual fantasies of men, which causes fear and anger in women, which causes men to feel guilty and to hide their fantasies.

Jesus promised torture, killing and weeping and gnashing of teeth. Along with some good wisdom, he used fear to control people. I have gotten the good about Jesus my whole life. That is what believers like to focus on and it helps the ministers keep their jobs. But, the whole picture of Jesus is generally not given and explained. That is why most people believe in Jesus and the Bible. It is because they don’t understand them. Being a Christian means that someone has wrapped all of their morality and understanding into a word which is created and interpreted by the individual.

“they obviously don't understand Jesus Christ AT ALL” Do you think I understand Jesus Christ at all? Please reference the Gospels scripture references in your answer.


In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I agree that science, logic, and respect for others are essential to good society, but the right interpretation of Christian doctrine should encourage these things, not reject them.

"Religion" is not synonymous with "Protestant Christian," and your personal bad experiences with religion do not prove that all religion is harmful. It's funny how you just sort of skipped over the second part of my sentence, "However, religion isn't harmful in and of itself, but the watering-down and misuse of doctrine is, yes, extraordinarily evil and damaging to both straight and gay people."

When I refer to the "watering down" of doctrines, I'm verifying what you said. It seems like most Christians today have no concept of the fact that faith does not have to be removed from logic, tolerance, and an open mind. "Faith," for some people, is a word to throw out when someone asks you a hard question. I do believe in faith. You and I both know that there are things that human beings don't and/or can't understand. Whereas you write faith off as belief in the supernatural, I believe that faith is belief in things that follow all of the laws of the cosmos, but that are beyond our power, knowledge, or understanding. Faith is not necessary for the purpose of dismissing science and logic. It is necessary so that we can have choice. People are always arguing with me about choice, saying that a god who threatens damnation is not truly offering choice. Well, that's a discussion for another day.

When religious people think that morality is black and white, when they are hateful, intolerant, or bigoted, they obviously don't understand Jesus Christ AT ALL. So when I say that religion is not inherently harmful, your 37 years of experience, I'm sorry to say, do not exhaust all of the possibilities religion has to offer.

“religion isn't harmful in and of itself, but the watering-down and misuse of doctrine is”

Sure, religion can be just a tool for good or bad. But, supernatural religions give humans the right to claim God’s word as their own. And, I don’t know I a supernatural doctrine that is infallible. Do you? Are you going to say that the doctrine has to be interpreted correctly? That is the problem. It will be misused because people get to interpret it as they see fit.

“I do believe in faith.” Words are arbitrary. What faith means to you is not what is means to mean me. Faith is used too broadly. The best use of it in our discussion is that faith is somehow evidence for religious people. “I have to have evidence that God exists. I have faith that God exists.” Somehow, theists get to interchange faith and evidence as if they are equal.

“Faith is not necessary for the purpose of dismissing science and logic.” Faith is a real problem when people start believing “I don’t have to know the answer. God knows the answer, and I trust God will take care of it.” That is not how science and technology works.

“People are always arguing with me about choice” If you would like to see a discussion between me and a Christian on the subject of choice and free will. Go to http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/9omev/some_questions_to_other_atheists/
and do a search for the users ABTechie or beldenge.


In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I agree that science, logic, and respect for others are essential to good society, but the right interpretation of Christian doctrine should encourage these things, not reject them.

"Religion" is not synonymous with "Protestant Christian," and your personal bad experiences with religion do not prove that all religion is harmful. It's funny how you just sort of skipped over the second part of my sentence, "However, religion isn't harmful in and of itself, but the watering-down and misuse of doctrine is, yes, extraordinarily evil and damaging to both straight and gay people."

When I refer to the "watering down" of doctrines, I'm verifying what you said. It seems like most Christians today have no concept of the fact that faith does not have to be removed from logic, tolerance, and an open mind. "Faith," for some people, is a word to throw out when someone asks you a hard question. I do believe in faith. You and I both know that there are things that human beings don't and/or can't understand. Whereas you write faith off as belief in the supernatural, I believe that faith is belief in things that follow all of the laws of the cosmos, but that are beyond our power, knowledge, or understanding. Faith is not necessary for the purpose of dismissing science and logic. It is necessary so that we can have choice. People are always arguing with me about choice, saying that a god who threatens damnation is not truly offering choice. Well, that's a discussion for another day.

When religious people think that morality is black and white, when they are hateful, intolerant, or bigoted, they obviously don't understand Jesus Christ AT ALL. So when I say that religion is not inherently harmful, your 37 years of experience, I'm sorry to say, do not exhaust all of the possibilities religion has to offer.

"the right interpretation of Christian doctrine" What is the right interpretation? That is the problem. Everybody gets to interpret scripture how they want to. Human interpretation not divine providence.

Why do you think "science, logic, and respect" would be encourage by Christian doctrine? Please back up what you say with scripture, preferably from the Gospels. Christians believe that a Christian marriage should be between 1 man and 1 woman. Why? Scripture doesn't support that. Some Christians believe that Jesus would accept homosexuality. Why? Jesus said that he came to fulfill the Law, not abolish it. (Matt. 5:17-20). Jesus was a Jew and didn't say that people get to abandon the Law and its 613 commandments that were given to the Jews hundreds of years before him. A lot of people believe in what they believe in because it is policy. Policy handed down to them by people they trusted, not because they came to some logical rational conclusion by use of the scientific method. And people can't see how it changes or know why it changes.

Study the Bible. You will see that it supports polygamy and slavery. Jesus never says to abandon these traditions. When Jesus says "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", he is quoting Leviticus.
Jesus promises to kill those who oppose him (Parable: Ten Minas - Luke 19:11-27). Jesus promises that God will torture people if they are unforgiving ( Parable: Unforgiving Servant - Matthew 18:21-35). Jesus is the Prince of Peace? “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:32-36). Jesus’ message is for everyone? No. (Matthew 10:5-8). When Jesus is talking during the story of the Marriage at the Resurrection, he doesn’t say that the Jewish tradition is wrong that a woman should be forced to marry a man’s brother if he dies and she hasn’t given him a male heir (Matt. 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40)

Jesus may have been radical for his time, but he is not the panacea that modern Christians make him out to be.


In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I agree that science, logic, and respect for others are essential to good society, but the right interpretation of Christian doctrine should encourage these things, not reject them.

"Religion" is not synonymous with "Protestant Christian," and your personal bad experiences with religion do not prove that all religion is harmful. It's funny how you just sort of skipped over the second part of my sentence, "However, religion isn't harmful in and of itself, but the watering-down and misuse of doctrine is, yes, extraordinarily evil and damaging to both straight and gay people."

When I refer to the "watering down" of doctrines, I'm verifying what you said. It seems like most Christians today have no concept of the fact that faith does not have to be removed from logic, tolerance, and an open mind. "Faith," for some people, is a word to throw out when someone asks you a hard question. I do believe in faith. You and I both know that there are things that human beings don't and/or can't understand. Whereas you write faith off as belief in the supernatural, I believe that faith is belief in things that follow all of the laws of the cosmos, but that are beyond our power, knowledge, or understanding. Faith is not necessary for the purpose of dismissing science and logic. It is necessary so that we can have choice. People are always arguing with me about choice, saying that a god who threatens damnation is not truly offering choice. Well, that's a discussion for another day.

When religious people think that morality is black and white, when they are hateful, intolerant, or bigoted, they obviously don't understand Jesus Christ AT ALL. So when I say that religion is not inherently harmful, your 37 years of experience, I'm sorry to say, do not exhaust all of the possibilities religion has to offer.

I thought you enjoyed these debates. If not, just leave it at that. I'm not looking to stir up shit.

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
I don't have the time or desire to have this argument with you, but I have rebuttals for these points. Maybe if I take it bow by blow I can get through it eventually.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
If he's perfect then progress is not possible by definition.

He's perfect in that he possesses every godlike attribute. It's not a matter of self-improvement. He is not increasing in love, mercy, knowledge, etc., but his creations and dominions are increasing, and his children are progressing. I don't see how that's a contradiction at all.

In reply to this comment by thepinky

The analogy of the video is flawed. Both the debtor and creditor have entered the contract willingly and with expectations of gain. I have agreed to no such contract with God and God has nothing to lose or gain by the defaulting or fulfillment of that contact, only I would. Because of this, justice is not relevant and a benevolent God would have no reason not to show mercy. Even if I were to believe God made me and gave me life, it would have been a gift given of his own free will. He has no right to require a gift in return. I have no debt to God.

God is a perfect being, yet he is eternally progressing.

A contradiction. If he's perfect then progress is not possible by definition.

If we suffer because of floods and famine, it will be for our good. You might say that people who live their entire lives in poverty are not benefitting from hardship, but God will reward us and make up a million times for our sufferings. You'd better believe that impoverished people are humble, and God has promised to reward the humble and meek. In the scope of eternity, suffering is a blessing. He has promised rewards in heaven for enduring our trials well that are beyond our comprehension. I think that's benevolent.

That's only benevolent if he doesn't have the power to make a difference during our lives. Let's say I found you locked in a cage in the woods. I can easily release you but instead I leave you there for 2 weeks. When I return I find you sick from exposure, dehydrated and starving. I then release you and take you home. I personally nurse you back to health over the course of 3 months and then take you on an exotic vacation, pampering you and catering to your every need. Have I been benevolent or should I have just let you out of the cage in the first place before any harm was done?

Like the video explains, in order for justice to be satisfied, Christ had to "pay for" our sins.

The video suggests this but explains nothing. As I said above, justice is not part of the equation because God has nothing to lose or gain from forgiving us (or not). Furthermore, we're talking about God. If God wants to forgive us it's entirely within his power to do so. He doesn't have to play by anyone else's rules. The only reason the sacrifice would have to "have a body, be separated from God, and die" is because God decided to do it that way.

On a side note, this just and loving God seems to require a lot of suffering to make him happy.

As a general rule, if something about Christian doctrine seems unjust or unmerciful or illogical to you, it is probably because it is wrong.

That's kinda my point, actually.

In reply to this comment by thepinky

Heh, I can understand your position. I still would love to read it at some point, flaws and all, but that's up to you.

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
In all honesty, I do have the paper, but I'm not sure I want to give it to you. Here's why: My professor told me that my paper was one of the top 3 student essays he had ever received, but he edited THE CRAP out of it. I got the paper back, but I still haven't made the changes. They aren't simple changes and it would take me hours. I could give you the unedited copy, but now that I know all of the flaws, I don't want anyone to read it until I fix them. You see my difficulty.

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
I wanna read that paper if you still have it lying around. I wrote a similar paper on Good and Evil as represented in Lord of the Rings (neerd), which I thought was very interesting. It could be interesting to see your perspective on the concept of evil.

In reply to this comment by thepinky:
You're all so eager to mock Christianity that I think you failed to notice how perverse this is. I wonder what's funny about a crucifixion machine. Considering the hundreds of thousands of people that were brutally and indiscriminately murdered in that way, both in the ancient and modern world, a crucifixion machine is about as funny as gas chambers and guillotines. At least gas chambers and guillotines are quick, whereas crucifixion is prolonged torture. Yeah. Hilarious.

Crucifixion was horrible torture, true. So: how many people have you seen lately wearing mini guillotines around the necks, or praying in front of mock gas chambers? How many people do you know, on the other hand, who worship an omniscient god who sent his son/self to get brutally tortured and murdered as a scapegoat for his believers?
Despite christianity's absurdity, millions still believe in it. Sometimes the absurd can only be tackled with more absurd. It's called satire.

I want to apologize to you. Having a baby has really changed my perspective; as corny as that sounds, it's true. I don't want to have enmity with anyone, anymore. It's not worth it and it's not healthy.

I want to appreciate you, from now on. You're ballsy, brave and willing to go to the ends of it to stand by what you believe in and those are wonderful and worthy traits to have.