hey there, great video... I also did a feature peice on the rapture a few days beforehand, having suspected the hoax as a method of gaining money through Family Radio advertising bills sold to the christian extremists, I.E. the retired transit worker in NY who spent 140 Grand on 1000 subway posters...
Plus, the whole premise of religion is to find the so-called ‘truth,’ so if someone carries out evil practices following a false religion, then what does that do in light of other religions? (-_-) Out of the hundreds of religions in the world, I would only consider 3 to be religions, and the rest to merely be belief systems. And from those 3, only one can be right.
@M3PanoS The purpose of religion isn't to find truth it claims to already have it. You don't have to seek the truth, because you have it in your special book already. The same book that says in the first chapter that eating from the tree of knowledge is a sin. Your religion says quite clearly, "Don't ask questions, don't seek the truth." You are also supporting my claim that you believe that your message is right and Muslims are wrong. Thanks for the validation.
And then you go on to say that ‘religion gives people a reason to kill’ which makes me severely pissed. We both know what religion you're talking about -but you choose to use religion as an umbrella term (this is the definition that needs reconciliation) to condemn all religions –we both know this isn’t so. As far as I know, most religions condemn any violence or hateful conduct, so how is it that you blame religion for the violence and acts of hate in the world? *cough*scapegoat*cough*
@M3PanoS The fact that you are pissed off about this shows how little you know about the bloody past of Christianity. The umbrella term very accurately describes your "3" monotheistic religions. Perhaps you never studied the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, or knew that Adolf Hitler was a devout Catholic and the Pope and Vatican refused to take opposition to the his attempts at genocide. There's the blood of a few million on your religions hands. Now go get educated, and then come back;)
@lukaslarson The fact that you went on about these facts only AFFIRMS my point, and somehow I had an inkling you'd bring this up. Did you even read what I said about how a religion can be judged SOLELY by its own merits and not its so-called practitioners? Show me where in the Bible what these men did is condoned. I can go on and on about Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. and not say anything about atheism, so how is it you can use those men to condemn religion? Double-standard scapegoating.
@M3PanoS I'm judging religion for it's merits, and that's what I've been doing from the beginning. Religion is source of this. This book does tell us that it's OK to beat slaves, women deserve to be stoned on their wedding night if they aren't virgins, and homosexuals must be killed for this eternal sin of being gay. Not to mention that the god described in that book is fine with murdering first born children of Egyptians who didn't smear blood on their doors. I AM judging religion on its merits
@lukaslarson I'm sure many anti-Christians would love to believe that Hitler was a devout Catholic in an attempt to discredit Christianity and religion at large, but like I already explained, what Hitler did was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus -so tell me, can you still claim Hitler to be Catholic? Oh by the way, I'm an atheist...I just act like I follow religion. lolwut?
@M3PanoS If you're an atheist, you certainly stand up quite thoroughly for christianity. I don't think Hitler was a real christian, just like most christians. I'm simply saying that The people of the Catholic faith supported genocide. Say what you want about Hitler, plenty of Christ's fans believed he was doing the right thing. Also, I don't know what the teachings of Jesus were just like you don't. I'm sure you haven't read the bible all the way through or you'd understand this. I'm done
do it for benevolent reasons, it doesn’t matter what he believed because his belief was based on pure internal conjecture –not Scripture or anything else of the like. Who in the world knows why he was convicted with the notion that he had to spread this idea to the world –but this point is moot, because regardless of his personal beliefs, the burden of analysis still rests on the shoulders of every individual to discern for themselves, which is the point I was initially making. (Fin)
pic. And then, when he is wrong, they all go on to criticize and hate him, when it was their own initial ignorance that lead them into the trap in the first place. Granted, this guy is a douche for what he said, he cannot be held accountable for the ignorance of other people.
Maybe he did it for the money, or maybe, as you said (giving him the benefit of the doubt), he did it because he genuinely believed, that by warning people, he was going to also save people. Assuming he did (continued)
You also said this guy just had a modest following of 'fundamentalist Christians' before this debacle, but any fundamentalist Christian would condemn him for his stupidity, citing the fact that the Bible explicitly states that no one knows when the end will come. The fact that he had a following, and that people of all walks of life, from atheists to Hindus to Jews to Muslims, even considered his preposition just illuminates how grossly left in the dark most people are about this to (continued)
Religion doesn't 'inflict damage' on others, people do. This way of thinking is similar enough, but not equivalent, to the argument: guns don't kill people, people kill people (an argument I agree with by the way).
Plus, that very statement is un-provable because you cannot objectively discern what is ‘helpful’ and what is 'harmful' to someone, and much less so to the world collectively.
@M3PanoS "Religion doesn't 'inflict damage' on others, people do." - False- without the belief that there is life after death there would be no martyrdom from fundamentalists. Religion gives people a reason to kill and die for. "Imagine there's no Heaven. It's easy if you try. No hell below us, Above us only sky... Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace" - John Lennon
@M3PanoS To give an analogy: Someone is infected with a virus that effects the way they think and act and distorts reality, and they begin killing people based on these delusions. You can't say that the person is at fault, because they had no way to overcome the virus, you have to blame the virus for this problem, and we have to fight religion just like we would fight a virus, because if we don't it consume our world and bring us to the true and only rapture - the completely man made one.
@lukaslarson Also, pertaining to your comment on the 'rapture' -the rapture isn't some apocalyptic, dreary, morose, hellish scene but rather the anti-thesis of it. The fact that you mistook it for something of the like only goes to re-affirm my very first point that the only people who would even pay attention to the May 21 claim in all honesty know not nearly enough about the claims being made to come to a *keyword* rational decision. ;)
I respect your right to have an opinion and your ability to reason, but I disagree with most of the things you said. Sorry for that last statement about being rational and the wink because after reading it again, it comes off as a dick move.
@M3PanoS I respect what you have to say, but your analogy was flawed. Owning a gun doesn't effect judgement or ability to reason rationally. Thanks for your insight though.
@lukaslarson Lol no it wasn't. I specifically said that it works (in specific contexts), but that it isn't equivalent. The reason you think it's flawed is because you think that people who are religious are irrational because of the fact that they believe in religion (circular reasoning). If someone is prone to being irrational and then they pick up religion, religion is not a cause of their irrationality but a byproduct of it.
@M3PanoS Granted, some people may be irrational, but belief in a certain religion is not by definition irrational, although some would like to believe so. There are plenty of irrational people on both sides of the argument; using ad hominem to attack the retards that claim to follow a religious sect, when in actuality, they act in contradiction to the sect's beliefs does absolutely nothing to discredit that religion.
@M3PanoS The religion itself can only be judged by its own merits -that is, what it teaches -not by the actions of people who claim to be practitioners of it. You lump all religions together and say that religions lead to 'martyrdom from fundamentalists,' but I don’t see a problem with that for anyone but the person dying (In actuality there are problems with the death, but I can’t address that until our definitions of religion are reconciled with one another).
Amen brother!
TammyRJensen 2 months ago
Thank you for posting! You seem like a very insightful person
DrShakesBALLIN 6 months ago
Spot on dude religion is such a scam
chriscash1982 9 months ago
hey there, great video... I also did a feature peice on the rapture a few days beforehand, having suspected the hoax as a method of gaining money through Family Radio advertising bills sold to the christian extremists, I.E. the retired transit worker in NY who spent 140 Grand on 1000 subway posters...
great job, thankyou! ^_^
NotoriousBroadcasts 9 months ago
Guys, you didn't get the memo? Yeah, everyone died. Damn.
evilromero 9 months ago
Bro you just said everything i had in my mind about this! Nice to hear im not the only one thinking like this
kunalkumarlamor 9 months ago
@kunalkumarlamor We aren't alone. Thanks a lot for commenting.
lukaslarson 9 months ago
Plus, the whole premise of religion is to find the so-called ‘truth,’ so if someone carries out evil practices following a false religion, then what does that do in light of other religions? (-_-) Out of the hundreds of religions in the world, I would only consider 3 to be religions, and the rest to merely be belief systems. And from those 3, only one can be right.
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS The purpose of religion isn't to find truth it claims to already have it. You don't have to seek the truth, because you have it in your special book already. The same book that says in the first chapter that eating from the tree of knowledge is a sin. Your religion says quite clearly, "Don't ask questions, don't seek the truth." You are also supporting my claim that you believe that your message is right and Muslims are wrong. Thanks for the validation.
lukaslarson 9 months ago
And then you go on to say that ‘religion gives people a reason to kill’ which makes me severely pissed. We both know what religion you're talking about -but you choose to use religion as an umbrella term (this is the definition that needs reconciliation) to condemn all religions –we both know this isn’t so. As far as I know, most religions condemn any violence or hateful conduct, so how is it that you blame religion for the violence and acts of hate in the world? *cough*scapegoat*cough*
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS The fact that you are pissed off about this shows how little you know about the bloody past of Christianity. The umbrella term very accurately describes your "3" monotheistic religions. Perhaps you never studied the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, or knew that Adolf Hitler was a devout Catholic and the Pope and Vatican refused to take opposition to the his attempts at genocide. There's the blood of a few million on your religions hands. Now go get educated, and then come back;)
lukaslarson 9 months ago
@lukaslarson The fact that you went on about these facts only AFFIRMS my point, and somehow I had an inkling you'd bring this up. Did you even read what I said about how a religion can be judged SOLELY by its own merits and not its so-called practitioners? Show me where in the Bible what these men did is condoned. I can go on and on about Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. and not say anything about atheism, so how is it you can use those men to condemn religion? Double-standard scapegoating.
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS I'm judging religion for it's merits, and that's what I've been doing from the beginning. Religion is source of this. This book does tell us that it's OK to beat slaves, women deserve to be stoned on their wedding night if they aren't virgins, and homosexuals must be killed for this eternal sin of being gay. Not to mention that the god described in that book is fine with murdering first born children of Egyptians who didn't smear blood on their doors. I AM judging religion on its merits
lukaslarson 9 months ago
@lukaslarson I'm sure many anti-Christians would love to believe that Hitler was a devout Catholic in an attempt to discredit Christianity and religion at large, but like I already explained, what Hitler did was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus -so tell me, can you still claim Hitler to be Catholic? Oh by the way, I'm an atheist...I just act like I follow religion. lolwut?
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS If you're an atheist, you certainly stand up quite thoroughly for christianity. I don't think Hitler was a real christian, just like most christians. I'm simply saying that The people of the Catholic faith supported genocide. Say what you want about Hitler, plenty of Christ's fans believed he was doing the right thing. Also, I don't know what the teachings of Jesus were just like you don't. I'm sure you haven't read the bible all the way through or you'd understand this. I'm done
lukaslarson 9 months ago
do it for benevolent reasons, it doesn’t matter what he believed because his belief was based on pure internal conjecture –not Scripture or anything else of the like. Who in the world knows why he was convicted with the notion that he had to spread this idea to the world –but this point is moot, because regardless of his personal beliefs, the burden of analysis still rests on the shoulders of every individual to discern for themselves, which is the point I was initially making. (Fin)
M3PanoS 9 months ago
pic. And then, when he is wrong, they all go on to criticize and hate him, when it was their own initial ignorance that lead them into the trap in the first place. Granted, this guy is a douche for what he said, he cannot be held accountable for the ignorance of other people.
Maybe he did it for the money, or maybe, as you said (giving him the benefit of the doubt), he did it because he genuinely believed, that by warning people, he was going to also save people. Assuming he did (continued)
M3PanoS 9 months ago
You also said this guy just had a modest following of 'fundamentalist Christians' before this debacle, but any fundamentalist Christian would condemn him for his stupidity, citing the fact that the Bible explicitly states that no one knows when the end will come. The fact that he had a following, and that people of all walks of life, from atheists to Hindus to Jews to Muslims, even considered his preposition just illuminates how grossly left in the dark most people are about this to (continued)
M3PanoS 9 months ago
In reference to your description:
Religion doesn't 'inflict damage' on others, people do. This way of thinking is similar enough, but not equivalent, to the argument: guns don't kill people, people kill people (an argument I agree with by the way).
Plus, that very statement is un-provable because you cannot objectively discern what is ‘helpful’ and what is 'harmful' to someone, and much less so to the world collectively.
M3PanoS 9 months ago
lukaslarson 9 months ago
@M3PanoS To give an analogy: Someone is infected with a virus that effects the way they think and act and distorts reality, and they begin killing people based on these delusions. You can't say that the person is at fault, because they had no way to overcome the virus, you have to blame the virus for this problem, and we have to fight religion just like we would fight a virus, because if we don't it consume our world and bring us to the true and only rapture - the completely man made one.
lukaslarson 9 months ago
@lukaslarson Also, pertaining to your comment on the 'rapture' -the rapture isn't some apocalyptic, dreary, morose, hellish scene but rather the anti-thesis of it. The fact that you mistook it for something of the like only goes to re-affirm my very first point that the only people who would even pay attention to the May 21 claim in all honesty know not nearly enough about the claims being made to come to a *keyword* rational decision. ;)
M3PanoS 9 months ago
I respect your right to have an opinion and your ability to reason, but I disagree with most of the things you said. Sorry for that last statement about being rational and the wink because after reading it again, it comes off as a dick move.
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS I respect what you have to say, but your analogy was flawed. Owning a gun doesn't effect judgement or ability to reason rationally. Thanks for your insight though.
lukaslarson 9 months ago
@lukaslarson Lol no it wasn't. I specifically said that it works (in specific contexts), but that it isn't equivalent. The reason you think it's flawed is because you think that people who are religious are irrational because of the fact that they believe in religion (circular reasoning). If someone is prone to being irrational and then they pick up religion, religion is not a cause of their irrationality but a byproduct of it.
M3PanoS 9 months ago
Comment removed
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS Granted, some people may be irrational, but belief in a certain religion is not by definition irrational, although some would like to believe so. There are plenty of irrational people on both sides of the argument; using ad hominem to attack the retards that claim to follow a religious sect, when in actuality, they act in contradiction to the sect's beliefs does absolutely nothing to discredit that religion.
M3PanoS
M3PanoS 9 months ago
@M3PanoS The religion itself can only be judged by its own merits -that is, what it teaches -not by the actions of people who claim to be practitioners of it. You lump all religions together and say that religions lead to 'martyrdom from fundamentalists,' but I don’t see a problem with that for anyone but the person dying (In actuality there are problems with the death, but I can’t address that until our definitions of religion are reconciled with one another).
M3PanoS 9 months ago