Debbie Moore was led by the Ruach HaKodesh ("Holy Spirit") by what she said in the video; that's clear to those who are likewise led and/or have read Romans.

Matt Slick gets 'The Daily Show' treatment in yesterday's show, how Christians are being bullied and persecuted for their views on LGBT:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mo...13/left-behind

I just found this really pathetic video of Slick from 2009 where he recounts his "I had a gay friend story" exactly as he did on TDS. He didn't get to the best bit though (presumably why he keeps bringing it up): this 'friend' repented of his homosexuality and married a woman because of Slick! Oh, and ofc goes on to talk about persecuted he is as a Christian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...TvyGMzvc#t=55s

"The white christian heterosexual male is being persecuted" thing still takes my breath away. I honestly don't understand how these guys keep a straight face.

More music than video, but whatevs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcgem...FAFB1FE0EF3F77

Coming soon: BANANANANAMAN IS BAAAACK!

First, "Hail Satan." Now..."the evangelical atheist."

http://youtu.be/o-eO8s5BALo

At this point t even know why he keeps beating this drum. Oh wait... it makes him lots and lots of money. That's probably it

I was wondering why the scientists even bothered to be a part of it, but Comfort basically accosted them at random locations. Here is PZ's interview with Jessica Ahlquist and friend crossing bananas in the foreground:

I really hate being right so much...

Be sure to tell us when it actually happens.


"Jason Queree, the man suspected of punching the protester multiple times, has been arrested 29 times since 1995. He has been convicted or otherwise found against for nine felonies, including forgery, stolen property, unlawful firearm possession and theft, and 12 misdemeanors, including driving with a suspended license, vehicle prowl, domestic violence, assault, DUI and criminal trespass."

And here's the link, for anyone that prefers quotes to come from a known source -> LINK

An interesting video, to be sure. Can't say that that one b**** didn't warn the preacher what was coming with her threats. Then the preacher has his sign ripped apart and he is tackled to the ground (not by Jason Queree.)

Cmon, Dogg tell us what you really think of gays already. You are so close... I know you want to.

True, but don't they still have to sign a release? I guess on some level these scientists think they are being educators but since comfort has creative control and can hack it to bits to serve his purposes (like he did with the trailer) I honestly see no purpose in this whatsoever.

the ladies with bananas remind me of the movie "The Master" for some reason

Fantastic.

Arizona State Rep. and atheist Juan Mendez delivering the opening session prayer.


And fellow Representatvive Steve Smith has a hissy fit about it.

Reza Aslan badgered on Fox News. The presenter... just don't geddit.



~4:00 the interviewer busts out CRRRRAAAAAAIIIIIIGGGGGG. Amazingly, Aslan fails to convert live on air. Oh well.

Incredibly tilting

fwiw, I don't quite get the outrage over this.

- Who expected any cable news host to have some in-depth factual understanding of the historical origins of christianity? I don't. Neither on Fox nor MSNBC, to be honest. RMaddow would probably let their staff write better questions, but it would still, effectively, be a number of talking points. So that the host is just stupidly sticking to her script is basically to be expected in any kind of cable news reality, imo.
- Since when do we get outraged that Fox is innuendo-laden and tendentious?
- The basic question "Why does a Muslim write about Jesus" may seem offensive or w/e, but it's probably the most prevalent question on any watchers mind - so any host not asking that would actually do a disservice for greater understanding.
- His appeal to his 4 degrees "including fluency in biblical greek" (OMIGAWD!! what a wizzard!!) is sort of lol in itself. I guess he wants to establish credentials, but I can't help thinking that esp. vs. a Fox audience, that won't work. Re anyone else, it comes across like an appeal to authority.

So, overall, in particular since he seemed to have a decent idea of what he was getting into, I think he was quite complicit in the overall head-assplode of the interview.

(I have to admit I clicked it away after four minutes or so)

And not meaning to **** on him or something:

His four degrees are:

None of that instills particular confidence in his scholarly credentials about the NT or early christian history.

Obviously you don't expect any newsreader or whatever to have in-depth knowledge etc. But what I would expect is a few set questions which, by their nature, prompt answers that explain what the book is about, its focus etc. Just kicking off by asking What the hell's a gawd dem Mooslim doing writing about Jesus? is just awful. But worse than that is continuing with it. I mean, OK, if she wants to ask that dumbass question, let her ask it, but once she gets the pathetically obvious answer (basically "The same reason any other Biblical scholar might, he was an interesting dude, you know?") then she should drop it.

I don't expect her to have read the book, but I also don't expect her to mount this impromptu editorial campaign questioning its very legitimacy, either. And dragging in some rent-a-quote from Craig - who, ironically, did his dissertation on Islam, IIRC - was pathetic, too, given how widely off-base it was.

And yeah, I'm sure he had some idea that a Fox anchor might be more hostile than usual. But appearances like that tend to veer on puffery: Here's so-and-so, he's written a book about such-and-such, why don't you tell us a little about it, Doc? That kind of thing. I seriously doubt he was expecting anything like what transpired.

Well, what do you expect her to do once she's sitting there with her talking points and no clue on the matter? He didn't particularly help matters by directing each question back to his scholarly credentials.



Her first question: "THis is an interesting book. Now, I want to be clear - you're a Muslim. So why did you write a book about the founder of christianity." ***

He looks aghast and goes into his "well to be clear, I'm a scholar blablabla" routine.

Here would be my answer: "That's a fair question. A couple of reasons. First, as a scholar on religions in general, I don't only research christianity, but it IS one major aspect of my particular interest and research. Two, as you probably know, Jesus is considered a prophet in Islam, moreover the last prophet before Muhammed. So even from a purely muslim perspective, there are numerous reasons why a book on him is merited. Thirdly, NT scholarly research is really not bound by faith. You have christians write about Jesus, but also non-christian historians. Furthermore, obv. you also have christians writing books about other religious figures of other religions. So while it may seem strange at first, it is really just the normal way in which research into the origins of religions works. Usually, outsiders' perspectives are quite welcome here as they provide fresh views."

ezee game. Anyway, I thought the entire thing was pretty overblown.

I really don't see how you can defend the stupidity and the ignorance of the line of questioning. Would a caucasian historian who wrote a book on slavery face the same questions, as it's pretty much the same thought (or lack of thought) process that seems to be at work here?