With all the denominations of bible followers out there I am surprised there isn't a Jainism like sect that falls more in line of the gospel of Luke. A Christian sect that literally keep no positions as Jesus commanded. They would have very little political influence and I don't think I would mind them so much.
lol you have a beef with him or something? well at least he isnt a mustard who kills for his allah. nice vid. Jesus" words somehow struck a cord in me...even though im atheist
“Look man, you are good at science but theology is not your thing. Not yet anyway, you have a lot to learn in my opinion. I think you should just stick to the science stuff for now!”
The only basis I can think of for such a position is the identification of severely invalid theological argumentation, on my behalf. If you have found no such flaws, then how have you come to your conclusion? If you have, then what flaws have you found?
Basically, that was never the point the gospel passage you have featured was making.
Jesus was not saying that having money or possessions is bad, he was saying the *love of money* is bad. There is a different path for everyone. In each of your lives you will have a different path. You may be reborn in this world and live a different life with a different path & different experiences, so our requirement in this life will be different than in another!
“Basically, that was never the point the gospel passage you have featured was making. Jesus was not saying that having money or possessions is bad, he was saying the *love of money* is bad.”
I never insinuated otherwise. You have entirely misunderstood my point. Please read my response to Jack (TogetherForPeace), here in the comment section, as well as the video description area for clarification.
@KTK401 -Just who do you think you are schooling? "Theology is not his thing..." For crying out loud!- Apparently you have no idea who you are talking to. LoL.
@KTK401 <-...sigh... dunno know why I even bother, but let's make something clear: one does not need "a degree" in nonsense to be able to debunk it. One does not need "a degree" in astrology to know it is silly. Dawkins critics reproach him in a similar (lame) fashion, but "this is fallacious because, although as a non-theologian he is not technically qualified to discuss the nature of God, as a scientist he is extremely qualified to discuss the nature of evidence."
@TheSensuousAtheist Dawkins is just a shrieking queen, who is utterly closed minded & even ignores common sense.
Nobody truly cares what Dawkins thinks or says other than a hardcore of atheist fundamentalists, who like religious fundamentalists are in "conflict mentality" & therefore incapable of even considering an opposing point of view.
Who the hell brought up that crackerjack Dawkins? Why do you even bother.....I have no idea & I have no idea what this has to do with me!
@Godusesamac. Why would God give an answer to a rich man that He knew he couldn't or wouldn't do. Wasn't Jesus here to show people how to get to Heaven rather than to play games. If Jesus gave the rich man an honest answer why would it only apply to him. It doesn't make sense that one person should have one requirement to get into Heaven while other people have other requirements. Finally, I'm sure that giving away all possessions would leave him poor. This boils down to bad advise by Jesus.
@XENAMAX Yes there is a different path for everyone. In each of your lives you will have a different path. You may be reborn in this world and live a different life with a different path and different experiences, so yes your requirement in this life will be different than in another!
@XENAMAX I didn't suggest that you NEED Jesus, but I think personally think that Jesus was in a sense a manifestation of "Goodness" in the Universe, or a manifestation of the "word of God" so to speak, so anyone who is following what we call the "Moral Law" & choosing Good or Evil is automatically following Jesus & therefore God, so you don't need to be a "christian" to get into heaven, all who are good gain heaven, even in this life not just after death of the body.
@Godusesamac "What I'm saying is that Jesus didn't necessarily mean this for everyone." Of course he didn't. That means you'd have to give up your stuff too, and that's just silly.
I don't intend this video to make the claim that he did or that he didn't. A few comments down is my response to Jack, where I explain my intentions and my thought process in making this video. I also put a modified version of that response in this video's description area.
@Godusesamac He was making a point about the human love for money. While that love for money, that service to greed as a master was there, they could not follow/serve/love him at the same time.
“If Jesus knew that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, that does [say] the expectation was not there to begin with.”
No, Jesus implied it was impossible for him in to enter Heaven *and* refrain from relinquishing his wealth as required. This doesn’t mean that he wasn’t being required to choose God *by* refraining from being wealthy.
@Godusesamac “Notice ‘please tell me what *I* must do to have eternal life.’ This was not a common man but a rich man. Jesus wasn't telling this individual to be poor, he chose the one thing he knew the guy could not do and that was part with his wealth.”
Yes, Jesus was clearly telling the man to relinquish all of his possessions. That the man wouldn’t do it is a demonstration that he is unwilling to do what is required of him, when the requirement is choosing God over wealth.
Shawn's understanding of morality was flawed from the start because he, like many fundies, think that morality is a "black and white" issue. Yet he even said himself that giving his money to the poor would be "more moral" which certainly entails there being shades of gray. Therefore the concept of an act being moral to do meaning it's immoral NOT to do it is just silly.
Nice selection to counter his overall premise though. Great to see a new video from you!
The only point I intend to make in this video is that if one is using Yahweh as a standard, regardless of whether it is or is not actually expected, such an expectation is not unrealistic for anyone—let alone someone with less to lose than a rich ruler.
I am simply addressing Shawn’s air of “well, clearly it would be unreasonable to expect that of a person, so we can just rule that out.” Hearing Shawn imply this reminded me of the rich ruler’s mindset of; “How unrealistic! I really like my possessions, so following you is too hard…” And sure enough, when I put Shawn’s voice to the movie clip, as if it were the ruler’s thoughts, it fit like a glove. I’ve just added this clarification in the description area.
Why do you think Vatican is the richest religious entity in the world? How well does their wealth sit in with the poorest people they exploit? It's really nothing of surprise that rich people (such as VFX) use religion to preach charity and generosity and turn around and say that what he preached is an "unrealistic expectation."
Religion is a tool made by rich and powerful to control weak and poor.
When VFX´s father dies one day and VFX inherits his dads bra-factory - what will he do? (In case you don´t know, VFX´s dad owns a dessous factory and he´s not poor.)
I guess he will keep everything and buy some more bandwith, prints books to give away for free to spread what he claims to be the word of the lord and what is his own words.
"Jesus was a peaceful radical revolutionary who was anti capitalism anti death penalty anti public prayer never anti gay didn't mention abortion long haired homeless middle eastern brown skinned Jew" - John Fugelsang
I can only assume that the defence will be that you've taken that quote from Luke 18:22 "out of context". The context being that most "christians" don't want to have to give up their stuff and so happily leave that cherry on the tree when they're deciding which bits of their scripture they will follow.
Using the NIV translation, Jesus said "Sell everything you have and give to the poor..."
If you have sold everything, then you have nothing to give (to the poor, or anyone else) other than the proceeds from what you sold. This is why other translations (NLT, ISV, WNT, etc) say "sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor..." Most (such as the NIV) are closer to the KJV when it says "sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor..."
So Jesus is still telling the man to give everything to the poor, but since many of his possessions would be useless to a poor person, he’s just telling him to first convert those possessions into the universally useful form of money.
@mauroprovatos No, the bible that was copied and translated many times, tells us that Jesus said "sell".
As far as I know, the greek word in that passage is πώλησον which can be translated as sell, exchange, barter.
Besides, if you have sold everything, what are you doing with all that money since you only can serve one, either God or money? I guess we have to give it to the poor then....
It is not unrealistic to give away everything you own - it is unconfortable. And when something is uncomfortable, the 'moral' fiber of the holy ones snap like a twig.
Lol ! Jesus PWNS VenomfanglessX !
allieron 5 months ago
With all the denominations of bible followers out there I am surprised there isn't a Jainism like sect that falls more in line of the gospel of Luke. A Christian sect that literally keep no positions as Jesus commanded. They would have very little political influence and I don't think I would mind them so much.
CorndogMaker 10 months ago
lol you have a beef with him or something? well at least he isnt a mustard who kills for his allah. nice vid. Jesus" words somehow struck a cord in me...even though im atheist
thepacquiaovsmosley 1 year ago
Look man, you are good at science but theology is not your thing. Not yet anyway, you have a lot to learn in my opinion.
I think you should just stick to the science stuff for now!
regards
KTK401 1 year ago
@KTK401
“Look man, you are good at science but theology is not your thing. Not yet anyway, you have a lot to learn in my opinion. I think you should just stick to the science stuff for now!”
The only basis I can think of for such a position is the identification of severely invalid theological argumentation, on my behalf. If you have found no such flaws, then how have you come to your conclusion? If you have, then what flaws have you found?
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
@SecularAstronomer Hi SA
Basically, that was never the point the gospel passage you have featured was making.
Jesus was not saying that having money or possessions is bad, he was saying the *love of money* is bad. There is a different path for everyone. In each of your lives you will have a different path. You may be reborn in this world and live a different life with a different path & different experiences, so our requirement in this life will be different than in another!
Peace bro!
KTK401 1 year ago
@KTK401
“Basically, that was never the point the gospel passage you have featured was making. Jesus was not saying that having money or possessions is bad, he was saying the *love of money* is bad.”
I never insinuated otherwise. You have entirely misunderstood my point. Please read my response to Jack (TogetherForPeace), here in the comment section, as well as the video description area for clarification.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
@SecularAstronomer Ok great!
Peace!
KTK401 1 year ago
@KTK401 -Just who do you think you are schooling? "Theology is not his thing..." For crying out loud!- Apparently you have no idea who you are talking to. LoL.
TheSensuousAtheist 1 year ago
@TheSensuousAtheist Well.....perhaps I should have directed that at you?
"schooling"? What kind of trash talk is that sunshine.
And as far as I can see SecularAstronomer does not claim to be a theologian
KTK401 1 year ago
@KTK401 <-...sigh... dunno know why I even bother, but let's make something clear: one does not need "a degree" in nonsense to be able to debunk it. One does not need "a degree" in astrology to know it is silly. Dawkins critics reproach him in a similar (lame) fashion, but "this is fallacious because, although as a non-theologian he is not technically qualified to discuss the nature of God, as a scientist he is extremely qualified to discuss the nature of evidence."
TheSensuousAtheist 1 year ago
@TheSensuousAtheist Dawkins is just a shrieking queen, who is utterly closed minded & even ignores common sense.
Nobody truly cares what Dawkins thinks or says other than a hardcore of atheist fundamentalists, who like religious fundamentalists are in "conflict mentality" & therefore incapable of even considering an opposing point of view.
Who the hell brought up that crackerjack Dawkins? Why do you even bother.....I have no idea & I have no idea what this has to do with me!
KTK401 1 year ago
@TheSensuousAtheist 1 more thing. Since you are an atheist, why are you on a discussion about Buddhism? Buddhism is NOT Atheism
I often wonder what the hell motivates atheists to enter discussions on religions & to then inject into it "well we don't have proof of God"
You have to accept that believers have already taken God as a given & are discussing their religions.
It is not a God vs Atheism debate so please save that stuff for the appropriate place.
regards
KTK401 1 year ago
@Godusesamac. Why would God give an answer to a rich man that He knew he couldn't or wouldn't do. Wasn't Jesus here to show people how to get to Heaven rather than to play games. If Jesus gave the rich man an honest answer why would it only apply to him. It doesn't make sense that one person should have one requirement to get into Heaven while other people have other requirements. Finally, I'm sure that giving away all possessions would leave him poor. This boils down to bad advise by Jesus.
XENAMAX 1 year ago
@XENAMAX Yes there is a different path for everyone. In each of your lives you will have a different path. You may be reborn in this world and live a different life with a different path and different experiences, so yes your requirement in this life will be different than in another!
Peace!
KTK401 1 year ago
@KTK401 I'm specifically talking about getting into Heaven. I understand we all follow different paths in life.
If there are unique ways for us each to get into Heaven then why do we need Jesus?
XENAMAX 1 year ago
@XENAMAX I didn't suggest that you NEED Jesus, but I think personally think that Jesus was in a sense a manifestation of "Goodness" in the Universe, or a manifestation of the "word of God" so to speak, so anyone who is following what we call the "Moral Law" & choosing Good or Evil is automatically following Jesus & therefore God, so you don't need to be a "christian" to get into heaven, all who are good gain heaven, even in this life not just after death of the body.
Peace!
KTK401 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Godusesamac "What I'm saying is that Jesus didn't necessarily mean this for everyone." Of course he didn't. That means you'd have to give up your stuff too, and that's just silly.
GR0ND 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
read your own adventure...cool
Pitfytr 1 year ago
@Godusesamac
I don't intend this video to make the claim that he did or that he didn't. A few comments down is my response to Jack, where I explain my intentions and my thought process in making this video. I also put a modified version of that response in this video's description area.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
Excellent video! Its amazing how would be Christians practice hypocrisy.
Looks like PCS still loves money more than his religion, after getting a taste for it by stealing it from kids.
"unreasonable" ...that is so very amusing!
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
@Godusesamac He was making a point about the human love for money. While that love for money, that service to greed as a master was there, they could not follow/serve/love him at the same time.
Elementary.
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
@ThatOneQuestion Exactly!
Jesus was not saying that having money or possessions is bad, he was saying the *love of money* is bad.
Simple really!
Peace!
KTK401 1 year ago
“If Jesus knew that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, that does [say] the expectation was not there to begin with.”
No, Jesus implied it was impossible for him in to enter Heaven *and* refrain from relinquishing his wealth as required. This doesn’t mean that he wasn’t being required to choose God *by* refraining from being wealthy.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
@Godusesamac “Notice ‘please tell me what *I* must do to have eternal life.’ This was not a common man but a rich man. Jesus wasn't telling this individual to be poor, he chose the one thing he knew the guy could not do and that was part with his wealth.”
Yes, Jesus was clearly telling the man to relinquish all of his possessions. That the man wouldn’t do it is a demonstration that he is unwilling to do what is required of him, when the requirement is choosing God over wealth.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
Shawn's understanding of morality was flawed from the start because he, like many fundies, think that morality is a "black and white" issue. Yet he even said himself that giving his money to the poor would be "more moral" which certainly entails there being shades of gray. Therefore the concept of an act being moral to do meaning it's immoral NOT to do it is just silly.
Nice selection to counter his overall premise though. Great to see a new video from you!
KingHeathen 1 year ago
That's the coldest depiction of Jesus I've ever seen.
Mozza314 1 year ago
Socialist he is taking about socialized healthcare impeach impea ch!!!
rightwingHateSpeech 1 year ago
i love watching religous people get owned with there own scripture...
viego215 1 year ago
No doubt your video put a smile on my face but in all fairness, Jesus is addressing the rich ruler, he is not asserting what everyone ought to do.
TogetherForPeace 1 year ago
@TogetherForPeace
The only point I intend to make in this video is that if one is using Yahweh as a standard, regardless of whether it is or is not actually expected, such an expectation is not unrealistic for anyone—let alone someone with less to lose than a rich ruler.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
I am simply addressing Shawn’s air of “well, clearly it would be unreasonable to expect that of a person, so we can just rule that out.” Hearing Shawn imply this reminded me of the rich ruler’s mindset of; “How unrealistic! I really like my possessions, so following you is too hard…” And sure enough, when I put Shawn’s voice to the movie clip, as if it were the ruler’s thoughts, it fit like a glove. I’ve just added this clarification in the description area.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago
Why do you think Vatican is the richest religious entity in the world? How well does their wealth sit in with the poorest people they exploit? It's really nothing of surprise that rich people (such as VFX) use religion to preach charity and generosity and turn around and say that what he preached is an "unrealistic expectation."
Religion is a tool made by rich and powerful to control weak and poor.
JaMoond 1 year ago
This leads me to a question:
When VFX´s father dies one day and VFX inherits his dads bra-factory - what will he do? (In case you don´t know, VFX´s dad owns a dessous factory and he´s not poor.)
I guess he will keep everything and buy some more bandwith, prints books to give away for free to spread what he claims to be the word of the lord and what is his own words.
enkidu23 1 year ago
Jesus was being sarcastic, dude. Geesh! Maybe if you had faith, you'd be able to interpret the Bible correctly.
D4Shawn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of course he says sell... Jews will be jews
16SKB 1 year ago
Owned!!
kenshin304 1 year ago
I really wish VFX would respond to this video. Have you sent him a message letting him know about it?
theinquisitor 1 year ago
Ironically, speaking of mistranslations, the word for "Camel" (kamelos) and the word for "Rope" (kamilos) are nearly identical.
Now which one makes more sense?
Also note that its in Greek, making it highly unlikely to be the eyewitness account of an Aramaic Jew peasant....
For fun, check out the meanings of "Born again" in the story of Nicodemus. It ONLY makes sense for Greek speakers.
Meaning the Bible is entirely myth by later scribes.
Isn't this fun @mauroprovatos?
johnycannuk 1 year ago
Isn't it strange that it is the literal believers who cherry pic the most?
MoveOrder 1 year ago
Good to hear from you and to know you're still out there, young old friend. Devastating, clever vid.
philhellenes 1 year ago
The first time VFX starts to make sense, he contradicts the Bible.
lovasip 1 year ago
"Jesus was a peaceful radical revolutionary who was anti capitalism anti death penalty anti public prayer never anti gay didn't mention abortion long haired homeless middle eastern brown skinned Jew" - John Fugelsang
VFX is so going to his own hell ;)
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
VFX is a twat and a complete waste of time.
MagnusIan 1 year ago
I can only assume that the defence will be that you've taken that quote from Luke 18:22 "out of context". The context being that most "christians" don't want to have to give up their stuff and so happily leave that cherry on the tree when they're deciding which bits of their scripture they will follow.
thatgaybloke 1 year ago
It's all of these fallacies why I don't follow religion.
Justinfh2point0 1 year ago
notice that jesus says "sell" not give away.
mauroprovatos 1 year ago
@mauroprovatos
Using the NIV translation, Jesus said "Sell everything you have and give to the poor..."
If you have sold everything, then you have nothing to give (to the poor, or anyone else) other than the proceeds from what you sold. This is why other translations (NLT, ISV, WNT, etc) say "sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor..." Most (such as the NIV) are closer to the KJV when it says "sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor..."
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago 7
@SecularAstronomer Think think this video hits Shawn right in the solar plexus.
JohnnYBEshould 10 months ago
So Jesus is still telling the man to give everything to the poor, but since many of his possessions would be useless to a poor person, he’s just telling him to first convert those possessions into the universally useful form of money.
SecularAstronomer 1 year ago 5
@mauroprovatos No, the bible that was copied and translated many times, tells us that Jesus said "sell".
As far as I know, the greek word in that passage is πώλησον which can be translated as sell, exchange, barter.
Besides, if you have sold everything, what are you doing with all that money since you only can serve one, either God or money? I guess we have to give it to the poor then....
Context, context, context!
DeletedDelusion 1 year ago
@DeletedDelusion
Yes, right. The meaning in context is very clear. Jesus is talking especially about rich people (but not only about rich people).
Simple example:
A rich person should sell his palace and give the money to the poor.
Now imagine the rich person would not sell his palace and give away the money but give his palace to ONE poor guy. Would this make sense?
lol
enkidu23 1 year ago
VFX, a literalist as long as it is convenient it seems....
What a surprise, NOT:
DeletedDelusion 1 year ago
It is not unrealistic to give away everything you own - it is unconfortable. And when something is uncomfortable, the 'moral' fiber of the holy ones snap like a twig.
MisterDax 1 year ago 2
@MisterDax Why did you write the same word twice, one of the times incorrectly. :o That's very peculiar.
Iced1992 1 year ago
Pwnd! At least VFX doesn't drown pigs.
thruthem 1 year ago