Jesus loves you and I love you. This is an extremely long post and I apologize. I am writing for anyone who is interested in critically examining the arguments Sam Harris makes and contrasting it to the actual truth as presented by the scripture. Sam has distorted this truth and the entire video is basically one long strawman argument.. I think that is you are going to utterly condemn something you should at least make a cursory effort to understand it. That's just me. I invite you guys to learn more about the scripture so that you can know the truth for yourself:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Bible-All-Worth/dp/0310246040/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1360718403&sr=1-2&keywords=how+to+understand+the+bible

I'll answer some points..

Sam: The point of Christianity is to safeguard the eternal well being of eternal souls

You could perhaps categorize this as the main point, but there are many points to Christianity. I don't want to split hairs here; I am agreeing with Sam essentially but I just want to expand on it a bit. The main point of Christianity is to declare the gospel of Jesus Christ. That's what Jesus said when He began His ministry: "repent and believe the gospel". The gospel is that Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, came to Earth to live as one of us. Though He did not sin, He took all of our sins upon Himself on the cross so that we could be forgiven and have eternal life. The point of Christianity is Jesus, and having a personal relationship with Him. Everyone who comes to know Jesus will be born again and become a new person. There are many other points to this but I will stop here.

Sam: 9 million children die every year

Yes, this is true but most of these children, if not all of them, will be going to Heaven. Not one of them have been forgotten by God or will suffer an unjust fate. There is an age of accountability for every person, and it is different for every person. It all depends on the revelation God has given each particular person and their response to it. It is fairly certain though that most if not all children under the age of 12 will make it to Heaven automatically.

Sam in discussing the dying children brings up the problem of evil..which has been sufficiently answered by Plantigas free will defense:

http://videosift.com/video/Since-Evil-Suffering-Exist-A-Loving-God-Cannot

Sam mentions the grief of the parents and that their unanswered prayers are part of Gods plan..

First of all, God answers every prayer, He just doesn't always answer yes. An example of a prayer God answered no to was when Jesus was in the garden of gethsemane and was asking the Father to let Him bypass the cross. Though it surely grieved His heart, He answered no to that prayer. He answered no because He was esteeming us more than Himself, which is what sacrificial love looks like. A key part of the prayer of Jesus was "never the less, not my will, but your will".

Christians do not pray to the exclusion of Gods will. we don't necessarily know what is best for us, but we trust God that He knows, and so we always pray that His will be done, even above what may seem needful for me at that time.

--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

I will also address the grief. The fact of the matter is, the scripture makes it very clear that Christians will suffer grief and loss on a constant basis:

Matthew 24:9

Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me.

1 Peter 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you:

1 Peter 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

Look at Pauls testimony:

1 Corinthians 11:24-28

Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again.

Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.

Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea,

I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers.

I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.

Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches.

If you read Foxes Book of the Martyrs (http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html) you will see that Christians are no strangers to suffering and grief. It is clearly taught in His word it will happen, which makes this argument have no weight at all and is simply a strawman.

Sam said that any God who would allow pain either can do nothing or doesnt care to so He is either impotent or evil

This is simply a false dichotomy. God may allow pain for a good reason, which is for the greater good. I'll give you an example:

This is Nick Vujicic, a man with no arms and no legs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXlCeKBWfaA

He is a motivational speaker and he has traveled around the world and inspired millions. Pretty much anyone who has a problem can relate to this man because Nick has overcome his extreme adversity with grace and he finds joy in his daily life. If God had answered Nicks prayer to be healed, then millions of people would have been robbed of the fruit that overcoming his adversity bore in his life. This is an example of how God can use pain for a greater good.

Sam asks what about all those who are praying to the wrong God, through no fault of their own..that they missed the revelation

This is just simply false..Sam seems to think that there are no reasonable answer to these questions when the real problem is his ignorance of Christian theology.

Romans 1:18-21

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

The word of God states that every man coming into the world is given light, and that God makes it clear to them one way or the other that He exists. Every man, woman and child dying after the age of accountability and heading towards hell had received a personal revelation from God as to His existence. How they responded to that light determined what Gods next move was. If they had responded in the affirmitive, He could have then opened the door for them to know Jesus and be saved. Since they responded in the negative, they did not receive any further revelation and died in their sins.

So again Sam creates a strawman argument when he says that they missed the revelation through no fault of their own. The truth is that they received the revelation and rejected it. He also made it sound like people are just randomly born into the world when what the scripture says is that God appoints the times and places for every human being. There are no accidents about where you are born; it is simply that God is not limited by time and space. He is omnipresent and not limited to any particular locality.

Sam accused God creating the cultural isolation of the hindus - of orchaestrating their ignorance

The truth is that in the beginning all men knew God and that over time as men formed nations they moved farther and farther away from the truth about God and invented their own gods to worship. The hindus isolated themselves, though again this is not a limitation on God. He has reached out to every hindu who has ever lived and the ones who ended up in hell are the ones who rejected Him. You have to push past the love, grace and mercy of God to get to hell.

Sam mentions how a serial killer could get saved while an innocent perishes elsewhere:

What the bible says is this:

Romans 3:23

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

There aren't any innocents over the age of accountability. The man who has cheated on his wife is equally guilty in Gods eyes as the man who murdered his wife. What God calls good is not a relative standard like human beings use, as we compare ourselves to eachother and think we are good people because we haven't done the big two (rape, murder). What God calls good is moral perfection and what He calls evil is everything that falls short of that, even one sin. He also says that if you hate someone you have murdered them in your heart and you are a murderer at heart. Sam does not appear to understand what the bible says Gods standards actually are.

Sam said that there is absolutely nothing in Christianity to do with moral accountability

Again, this is false. What the bible says is that we're morally accountable to God for every sin we've ever committed, and your conscience will tell you that. It is not other people we have offended, it is God Almighty. What Sam seems to have a problem with is Gods absolute standard for moral accountability versus his relative standard (which conveniently excuses his sins against God)

Sam said there is a conflict between God being intrinsically good and what he describes as the "visitation of cruel unjust suffering on innocent people"

I've already answered this by point out there are no innocent people over the age of accountability. I would also like to add that God created a perfect world, and the reason there is sin in this world is because of mankind. The reason the world is the way it is today is exclusively because of the daily crimes of humanity (can you even begin to imagine the amount of evil that transpires on planet earth in one day?) and not because God wanted it that way.

Sam says it is a cop out to say God is mysterious and then use merely human understanding to establish goodness

Actually, what Sam has done here is create a distorted image of God by twisting or ignoring what the scripture says about Him, and the fate of human beings. Then he points to this grotesque image to condemn the true and living God who is in fact perfectly good. The truth is that His goodness is upheld entirely when you are looking at the true God through a sound understanding of scripture and not the distorted image Sam has created of Him.

Sam says its a cop out to be told God is mysterious to justify untold suffering

He is right here, it is a cop-out..and anyone making such an argument has a weak understanding of the bible. Gods will for us is actually no mystery; God makes it crystal clear what He expects from His creation, and kinds of things we will face. He is even gracious enough to tell us what will happen in the future, thousands of years in advance:

http://www.christadelphianals.org/bible_prophecy.htm

Sam says it is utter hubris and even reprehensible to think you're special because "God loves me don't you know"

Yet even little children understand that no one is worthy to be pardoned for their sins and no one can make it into Heaven on their own. There is absolutely no difference between me and anyone else except for one thing; I said yes to God, and some others say no. I am not worthy, in fact I am decidedly unworthy and I deserve the exact same punishment as everyone else does; the difference is that I accept the free gift of grace that Jesus offers upon the cross. God proved His love for all people on the cross, and He died for every single person, not just me. Jesus loves you more than you can understand.

Sam says it is morally reprehensible for Christians to drudge up some trivial circumstance God took care of while completely ignoring the suffering of other human beings

Sam is right about this and it is a complete shame to Christians everywhere that the western church is so materialistic and base in their feelings. Jesus called us to live a life of total sacrifice and to give up everything we have. I can tell you that God is even more appalled than Sam is about this issue.

Sam asserted that the bible supports slavery

This is false; the bible does not support slavery. Slavery as we understand it today is not the same as it was in the time this was written. In those times it was more of a profession and people would sell themselves into slavery so they could have food and shelter. The bible regulated these activities, but it also said that there was no difference between master and slave and that we are all equal in Christ Jesus. I will also point out that modern slavery was ended by Christians.

Sam says that the bible admonishes us to kill people for witchcraft

No, it does not admonish Christians to kill witches, or anyone else. There is no commandment for any Christians to murder anyone. It is true, however, that in the time of the Old Covenant, God set up laws for Israel which were very strictly enforced with the punishment of death. This was not anything that He ever imposed on the world, or any other people except the Jews. He also did not impose it on them: the Jews made a covenant with God to obey all of His laws, so that He would be their God, and they would be His people.

Sam says that there is absolutely nothing anyone can say against Muslims if they prayed to the right God

The God of the bible is not morally inconsistant, whereas the god of the muslims is.

Sam said Christianity is what only lunatics could believe on their own

The bible says this:

1 Corinthians 1:18

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

The scripture itself says that unsaved people will find the message of the cross foolish. This is the evidence that you are perishing. The things of the Spirit of God are foolish to the natural man, neither can he understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Sam made a little quip about catholicism

While I am sure there are saved catholics, the church itself departed from the true teachings of Jesus a long time ago.. There is also no teaching in the scripture regarding the Eucharist.

Sam said its very strange salvation depends bad evidence

God gives everyone good evidence that He exists but they suppress the truth. God reveals Himself through personal revelation. You cannot know God otherwise.

Sam says Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice

Jesus wasn't sacrificed against His will:

John 10:18

No one can take my life from me. I sacrifice it voluntarily. For I have the authority to lay it down when I want to and also to take it up again. For this is what my Father has commanded."

He gave His life just as firemen have given their lives trying to save people from a burning building. Jesus didn't have to go to the cross but He did it out of love for us:

John 15:13

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Sam says the bible doesnt repudiate human sacrifice, that it celebrates it

Actually, it does repudiate it in many locations. The practice of sacrificing humans was utterly condemned in scripture. Jesus voluntarily giving Himself for the sins of the world does not resemble what Sam is implying even superficially.

Sam states that people used to bury children under the foundation of buildings and then says "these are the sorts of people who wrote the bible"

The kind of people who wrote the bible were eye witnesses to the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. They did not bury children under foundations; they followed the true and living God.

Sam said that if there is a less moral moral framework he hadn't heard of it

As he has presented it, most certainly, but the problem is that he largely invented it from his misunderstanding of Christian theology and personal prejudices.

The true question is this: are you an honest or dishonest skeptic? If you're an honest skeptic you will investigate, but a dishonest skeptic doesn't want to know. You will have to admit that you do not know whether God answers prayer or not, so here is a possible clue to knowledge:

Pray this: God, I don't know if you're there or not, and I don't know if the bible is your word or not. I am asking you to reveal the truth to me, and if you do, I promise to follow it where ever it leads. If it leads to Jesus, I will give my life to Him and follow Him.

After praying this, read the gospel of John. Read it slowly, a little at a time, each time beforehand praying that God will give you revelation concerning what you're reading. If you do this, by the time you reach the end of the gospel your skepticism will have grown wings and flown away.

God bless.

Same happened to poker in Poland. None of the legislators understood what it is, for them it was just gambling same to the one armed bandits in smoky bars, so they banned it... Similar thing happened to the betting legislation. Pity.

>> ^Sagemind:

America is supposed to be that wonderland that everyone aspires to become - only it isn't.
The people around the world still hold on to that idea. By asking them to vote - they would project their vision of the ideal country upon the USA, instead of having the already jaded and defeated population do the voting.
It's always easier to see something from the outside.


The "jaded and defeated population" don't vote.

I can get a BBQ meatball sandwich delivered to my house if'n I don't feel like bothering with putting my shoes on. Just about any kind of food I desire is available to me. When I'm feeling olympic and must forage for food, I have my choice of 6 large chain grocery stores within three miles of my home. I have a car. I can go anywhere I please in this country without fear. I have 240 channels (60 HD) on my television. There's a convenience store two minutes in every direction from just about every square foot of this country (seemingly). I can hike in the wilderness far from "civilization" and not have to worry about bandits or terrorists, and because I have the entire fricking world in the palm of my hand, I'll never get lost. I don't have a computer. I have four computers with high speed access. I have running water; hot water on tap, a microwave, and more goddamn dishes and silverware and towels and t-shirts than any one person should ever need. I can go see the Blazers play, watch live jazz, a choice of music festivals during the spring and summer, live theater, short trip west to the beautiful Oregon coast, or trip south for the Timber Festival or one of several plays in Ashland at the Shakespearean Festival. When I opt to go see a movie over reading any damn book in the world on my Kindle, there's seven movie theaters in my area, and I can even afford the insane prices for soda and Raisenets. Education opportunities abound here, regardless of your age or income. You can learn how to fly a plane at several local small airports, or jump out of one. I have a "headphone drawer".

I make less money than the average American, and I'm RICH, and thankful that I was so damn lucky to be born in the United States of Wonderland.

I somewhat agree with this review. It certainly is a shallow game, with some odd mechanics and a really bad quest system. That said, the variety of guns is huge so it's real fun when you find something new. The combat is invigorating and can be quite challenging (especially in co-op). But really this game isn't about story, or snappy mechanics, or innovative design. It's about finding ever-bigger guns and blowing the heads off random bandit bad guys.

I think one of the bad things is your fun is directly related to your luck in finding good weapons. I'm sure many folks have had bad luck and spent a few hours with a new character and gotten shit guns throughout. For me it was the Siren who (early on) has about the most useless special power of all four classes. I really, really liked the Siren from the first game so I stick with the class but it took about 10 hours or so before Siren began to get fun as I unlocked better talents and 'FINALLY' found a few decent guns.

I'm about to upload a rare flick to You Tube, Leni Reifenstahl's Das.Blaue.Licht.1932, a rare snoozer procured through free and easy file-sharing.

If her estate cares anything about clearing up the tarnished name of an incredible talent they should be fine with it ~ If not, YouTube sends a shot across the bow and there's no harm or foul, just a friendly reminder to, "Don't Doo Dat!" (Probably some fucking self-hating Nazi or Jew, anyhow....)

Do the same with ANYTHING that has to do with Tallulah Bankhead (last feature film made in 1965), and her estate goes ballistic....PROBABLY because certain people who think lawyers can solve problems waste millions of dollars trying to get their way through intimidation and evil.

The lawyers are their employers are the only ones making out like bandits on copyright laws and the artists matter not: The people who hired the lawyers are the ones who have fucked the artists through contract already!

Fuck em all, when pirating and "illegal" downloads stop on the internet is the day I take up noodling or cribbage and convert my computer case into a nest for opossum!

>> ^jqpublick:

Being a Canadian, I stand 100% behind her. We don't know for sure who made these calls (choke, cough cough, hack hack) but when we do find out (at least one riding is now going to have a re-election due to these calls) and when enough of the affected ridings get their fair shots at casting their votes, I for one hope the guilty parties go to jail for a long long time.
I live in one of the ridings that got these calls, and both my roommate and I received calls telling us to go to another polling station. I called Elections Canada and was informed that they do not make phone calls but that they had received an unusual number of complaints.


This happens every election cycle here in the US, though predominantly to the young, the poor and the minorities. There are over 120 new laws on the books here in the States restricting the voting rights of those folks, sending out mail saying you have to vote on x day. It happens every election year in this country and it's only going to get worse for one reason... The republican voting block is shrinking. Younger people, blacks, and especially Latinos, these groups are growing rapidly and vote democrat predominantly, so instead of trying to actually get these groups on board by supporting them, republicans do their best to restrict their ability to vote. It's why a number of states (mostly southern states) make it so you need a state ID to vote and make it extremely hard to get new IDs, especially in the inner cities. In some states you cant vote with a student ID, but you can with a gun license. Florida has a new state law that makes it illegal for groups to help people register to vote. How preposterous is that? This is all in the name of 'voter fraud'. Funny thing is, in the last several years there have been a total of five.. yes.. five.. cases of this that actually went to court in the entire United States. Whats really funny is that two of them were republicans who held an office. One was a secretary of state! (The person in each state tasked with making sure voting and elections go smoothly in essence.)

I feel bad for Canadians. Their government has essentially been paid off by the oil industry. They are making out like bandits up there and their beautiful country is being torn apart (both physically and socially) because of it.

I guess you haters are gonna hate. I've been a will smith fan since he was the fresh prince, long before he had a TV show, and he is as real as being a global superstar allows.

And Smith was all class here. The classless reaction would be a right hook to the jaw, and a foot to the ass. The truly classless act: when the guy sexually assaulted Smith; that's a felony in the U.S. I don't know what you expect Smith to do in that situation, or what you would do.

Mr. Kissing Bandit got off easy, really.

How is this arse bandit still in charge? Oh, election fraud. That's right

>> ^spoco2:

You justify your downloading your way, I do it mine. Let's leave it at that


See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. What's the point of having a conversation if you only want to talk to people who agree with you?

It seems to me that you're just drawing the conclusions from what I say that make you feel better about your behavior. Maybe "an orgy of self congratulation" would've been a better metaphor.

It's important to point out here too, that the money issue was just one of many that might affect my decision. A decision which by the way, was never actually made. All I said was that I didn't think that I would have a problem stealing from the guy. And I've already said twice now that I probably wouldn't download it. But since the first thing you harped on didn't work out for you, you'll just move on to the next single issue that you can label as some popular opinion. There are countless issues to bring up about the subject, and I brought up at least a few. But I never said anything like: "I will download this because of this".

And speaking of the money thing, I'm kind of wondering if five dollars is really that cheap. Sure, it's not a lot of money, but I can buy most of Louis C.K.'s DVDs for around fifteen bucks. Let's compare:

For fifteen dollars, I can get a physical copy of something. I can loan it to a friend or put it in a box, unwrapped for years and who knows, it might even be worth more sometime in the future. And even if it's not, I can still sell it if I get tired of it and maybe take a dollar or two off of the next DVD I buy. Shit, I can trade for a sandwich maybe!

I can't loan the digital copy to a friend and it's certainly not going to increase in value(it wouldn't matter anyway, because I can't sell it or trade it). And if anything happens and my computer crashes, the only way I could've prevented it's loss is by... making a digital copy. See the irony there?

Not to mention, a DVD involves hundreds if not thousands of people to make. All the people who produce the raw materials, the marketers, the people who manufacture the final product, the people who ship the final product and let's not forget the people who sell it. All those people take a bite of a measly fifteen bucks. To me, when you compare the two, the guy who sells a digital copy for five bucks and only has to pay the production crew(which the DVD people have to pay as well) and what? a few web techs? That guy's making out like a bandit if you ask me.

I know, maybe I don't make that strong of a case. But at least I know how to have a fucking conversation.

Had something like this happen. I was just wandering the plains of whiterun, and a couple bandits jumped me.

No problem, they're bandits. I destroy the one and whack the other but my enchanted mace sent him fleeing.

I use heavy armour so sprinting is teh suck so he started getting away.

Ran right into two giants.

This exact scenario happened.

...never got to loot the corpse.

Banks are not forced to make huge profits that drive up their share price and create huge dividends for their stockholders. They CHOOSE to make huge profits that drive up their share price and create huge dividends because they CAN. They didn't used to.

You speak like banks are supposed to act like a charity, or a public work like a sidewalk. Banks didn't 'used to' try to earn profits? When was that - exactly? Profits on home loans used to be based on the interest. Why did that change? Because politicians changed the laws. Loans became cheap and the poor, middle-class, and rich all started getting bigger loans (or more loans) that they couldn't have gotten under the old system. They all did it not because banks were 'forcing' them, but because they could make out like bandits while it was all clicking.

Canada didn't have the same problems our country had, because they had BANKING REGULATIONS.

Regulations that the US also had before government interfered in the marketplace. Government removed Glass-Steagall - not the banks. Prog-libs may whine about the banks acting unscrupulously, but you don't see mass arrests and prosecutions do you? Why? Because the cold hard reality is that banks did not break any laws. They simply followed the laws that government created. Don't like what they did? Blame the government. Prog-libs say government didn't 'force banks' to lend bad money. True. But you know what? Banks didn't 'force consumers' to borrow bad money either. But both banks and consumers acted stupidly for the same reason... Because government said it was fine.

And when you say the government pushed for subprime lending so everybody could buy a house, don't you mean bank lobbyists told Bush to push the idea in the first place?

The whole push for this started under Jimmy Carter, built up in the 80s & 90s, and finally took place with Bill Clinton in 1999. Did bank lobbyists push for it? Of course - mostly the bigger financial houses who were really limited by Glass-Steagall. The GOP was all OK with it too - alas. Democrats (particularly Barney Frank) were salivating over it. The rhetoric that built up to the final passage was mostly about how banks who were redlining poor minorities, and repealing G/S wouldu help everyone get homes, increase bank profits, fix your truck, and cure cancer. Both the GOP and Dems let this happen. Nowhere near enough people tried to stop it.

But let's call a tiger a tiger here... Standing up for Glass-Stegall in 1999 was a tough position to take. The proponents of the change were blasting anyone who opposed it as a racist, or a rich fat-cat that just didn't want 'the poor' to get a break. If you were against the repeal, all you could do is point at the Great Depression, and very distant macro-economic philosophies. We now have the 20/20 hindsight to see clearly that it was really the people trying to repeal G/S who were the jerks, @$$hats, and slimeballs. But in 1999 it was very different. Bush never 'speechified' it. In fact, Bush tried to get some reforms going in 2005 long before the bubble popped. But it was slapped down for the same reasons as the before. Wasn't until September/October 2007 that reality finally hit.

Childhood memories of playing BMX bandits while being dive bombed by these buggers. Frightens the bejesus out of you.

>> ^TheSluiceGate:

>> ^ponceleon:
Nicole Kidman in BMX Bandits... yum

15 year olds are your bag?


...back then they were...

>> ^ponceleon:

Nicole Kidman in BMX Bandits... yum


15 year olds are your bag?

Nicole Kidman in BMX Bandits... yum